



4 o 





** ^ V .'M- "v <**' .' 





?&m£. 






THE 



GREAT IRON WHEEL; 



$*ptt&luanism §atlttoarfts 



AND 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 

IN A SERIES OF LETTERS 

ADDRESSED TO J. SOULE, SENIOR BISHOP OF THE M. E. CHURCH, SOUTH. 



BY 



J. R. GRAVES, 



Editor of " The Tennessee Baptiet," NaehTille, 



^ 



p^RIC^ 



ST. 



NASHVILLE : 
GRAVES AND MARKS 

NEW YORK: 

SHELDON, LAMPOR* & CO. 

1855. 



Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 18M. by 

J. It. GRAVES, 

in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the District of 

Tennessee. 




DEDICATION. 



TO 

3E\itx$ American 

WHO LOVES OUR FREE INSTITUTIONS AND SCORNS TO BE DEGRADED OR 
ENSLAVED IN CHURCH OR STATE ; 

2lq Hbccg €:?)risttaix 

WHO LOVES THE TRUTH, AND DESIRES TO SERVE NO MASTER BUT JESUS, 
AND OBEY NO KING OR LAWGIVER BUT CHRIST, THIS 
WORK IS MOST CONFIDENTLY DEDICATED BY 

ITS AUTHOR, 

WHO HERE, MOST AFFECTIONATELY ACKNOWLEDGES HIS INDEBTEDNESS 

FOR AN ARDENT AND EARLY IMPLANTED LOVE OF REPUBLICANISM, IN 

CIVIL AND ECCLESIASTICAL GOVERNMENT, TO THE FAITHFUL 

TEACHINGS, AND, ABOVE ALL, FOR HIS HUMBLE HOPE 

IN CHRIST, TO THE CONSTANT PRAYER, AND 

PIOUS EXAMPLE, OF HIS MOTHER. 




THE 

OF CONGEEI 






PREFACE 



The Authoi offers no apology for writing these letters upon the 
polity and doctrines of Methodism. He has done so, because he 
believed it to be his duty ; and, doing it in the exercise of hig 
inalienable right of " freedom of speech and the press ;" having 
infringed the rights of no man, he offers apology to none. 

They appear in their present form in compliance with the earnest 
wish of the thousands who read many of them in the columns of the 
Tennessee Baptist, for which they were originally written. 

That, as literary productions, they are open to criticism, the au- 
thor is fully aware ; but they were not written for mere critics, in 
whose eyes the very heavens are unclean, but to men's business and 
bosoms, with sufficient perspicuity to be understood, it is hoped, and 
with sufficient force to be felt. 

The Author is confident that he will command the charity of 
those whom these letters may reach in their present form, by the 
simple statement, that they were thrown off at odd intervals of time 
snatched from the slavish routine of excessive editorial labors ; and 
as the thought presented itself, it was hastily clothed with the first 
garment at hand, without time to use either brush or powder, chalk 
or rouge, and in such a garb they now go forth. To prepare them 
as the Author would desire to do, would require an amount of time 
which he despairs of being able to command for years to come. 

The amount of repetition which occurs in the book is attributable 
to the fact, that each letter was originally intended for a separate 

1 W 



yi PREFACE. 

tract (in which form many of them will yet appear), that would be 
read by hundreds who might see none of the preceding or succeed- 
ing ones. But this feature, so far from proving a fault, may, unless 
so frequent as to tire, prove one of the excellencies of the book, since 
those points so repeatedly brought up are usually the most ob- 
noxious features in the system under review, and their deformities 
will thus be the more thoroughly and forcibly impressed upon the 
reader's mind. 

There is a class, and perhaps a large one, who may look upon 
these letters as an unprovoked attack upon an unoffending and 
peaceable denomination, and therefore pass sentence of condemnation 
upon it. It is not so much an unprovoked attack upon the unoffend- 
ing, as a defensive attack upon the bellicose. The reader is here re- 
ferred to the Introductory Letter. It is very far from being made 
upon a peaceable and unoffending denomination, but rather a battery 
reared against the most belligerent and offensive of all Protestant 
sects. The public is pointed to the weekly and monthly publications 
issued by the Conference presses from Maine to Florida, with which 
the land is being filled, and to the numberless books and tracts 
issued in one ceaseless tide from the mammoth Book Concern in 
New York, with which the land is being flooded ! Are these unoffend- 
ing and inoffensive publications? And is this Concern a great 
" peace establishment ?" Let any one examine one invoice of the 
controversial works and doctrinal tracts daily sent forth to the 
North and the South, to the East, and especially to the " Great 
West," and be satisfied as to their character. What assaults do they 
not contain upon Presbyterianism — upon the doctrines of Calvin and 
his "horrible decree!" In what terms are the doctrines of election 
and sovereign grace repudiated and denounced ! The Episcopalians 
do not escape, for here are tracts especially devoted to the ex- 
posure of their claims, while no quarter is shown to Eepublican 
Methodists. But the author has not volunteered in the defence 
of these sects, since they are so well able to protect their own 
doctrines and practices against the attacks of their Methodist 
brethren. 

He writes as a Baptist, and in behalf of Baptists. And have we 






PREFACE. VJi 

no cause to issue a defence ; at least to show our assailants the 
weakness of their positions ? In these publications, which are so 
rapidly multiplying, history is most grossly attacked and mis- 
represented, our distinctive doctrines most ruthlessly assailed, and 
our peculiar practices most shamefully reproached, and the most 
unwarrantable representations and appeals made to sour the pub- 
lic mind and inflame the bitterest prejudices of the multitude against 
American Baptists. Are instances demanded ? He points to the 
pages of a work very largely circulated in Virginia and the South. 
Bead this : " While I am fully convinced that the Baptists, as 
a denomination, had their rise in Germany in 1521 or 1832, under 
Nicholas Stork, Muntzer, John of Leyden, Kurpperdoling, and 
others, I have forborne giving an account of them as it is found in 
Kobinson's Charles V., and in a Yiew of All Eeligions, by Boss, 
published in London, 1664 ; as I know the matter to be very offen- 
sive to our Baptist friends," &c— P. 9. 

Again, "Thomas Stork held communion with God by means 
of an angel, < yet I will not retaliate by recounting the doctrines 
and practices of the German Anabaptists." * These are specimens 
of attacks made upon the History of Baptists, and this and 
other works are issuing by thousands monthly from the " Concern." 
The reader is referred to Letter XXXVII. (and will he turn and 
read it in this connection ?) for samples of the language used with re- 
ference to our baptism— the action we exclusively practise being de- 
nounced as superstitious, indecent, disgusting, and sinful ; and our 
terms of communion are constantly and everywhere assailed and 
repudiated in unmeasured terms of condemnation and reproach. 

The " Great West" is to-day one great battle-field ; and indeed the 
J whole South is intensely agitated upon these questions, and the 
(publications of the Book Concern, and numberless others, issuing 
Ifrom the Methodist press, South and West, more shameless even 
than the above, are brought into the field. The ten thousand 
circuit-riders echo and iterate and reiterate these sentiments in the 



* Slicer on Baptism For the testimony of candid Historians, see chapter on Primi- 
ire Church Constitution. 



yuj PREFACE. 

ear of the multitade, and scatter these books and tracts broadcast, 
as the winds scatter the autumnal leaves. The Author then appeals 
to the press and to the world to decide, if Baptists do not owe it 
to themselves and to the principles they represent and most consci- 
entiously believe, to defend themselves from undeserved contumely, 
and their principles from unmerited reproach ? If these Letters are 
considered an attack, let them be looked upon as an attempt to 
spike the enemy's guns, in which effort, the aid of the Baptist press 
of America is most affectionately and earnestly invoked. 

Nor have these Letters been written in a bitter and vindictive 
spirit, although the severity of the language employed may occa- 
sionally indicate it. The Author has not been conscious of enter- 
taining such an emotion for one moment. He has written " more 
in sorrow than in anger." He entertains the kindest feelings to- 
wards all Christians, and those whom he considers in error, he looks 
upon as " more sinned against than sinning," for their leaders do 
cause them to err. Principles, and not men, he has endeavored to 
discuss, and erroneous and pernicious principles cannot meet with! 
reprehension too severe, if the Saviour or the apostles are allowed, 
to be worthy examples in the rebuke of such. 

With fervent prayer, that the Letters may accomplish the end for 
which they were written, and that any angry feelings they may at 
first awaken, may be overruled to a candid investigation of the 
facts advanced and the principles advocated, they are now sub- 
mitted by the 

AUTHOR. 



Nashville, Jan* 1855. 



LI 



CONTENTS 



INTRODUCTORY LETTER, 9 

LETTER II.— Methodism cannot justly be called a Church of Christ, because 
too young by 1747 years— it being only 63 years old, 19 

LETTER III.— The system of Methodism cannot justly claim to be a Church 
of Christ, because of human origin— an invention of men, ... 34 

LETTER IY.— An important principle— the Church of Christ is of Divine 
origin— founded by Christ in the days of the Csesars— Methodism, by John 
Wesley in the days of George III., " 44 

LETTER V.— Christ forbade his disciples to teach the observance of any 
thing he had not taught them— Admission of Dr. Bangs— Methodism a 
human invention ; proved by Bishop Soule's own words, by Wesley and 
Methodist writers generally— is the granddaughter of Rome— the grandchild 
of the " Man of Sin," and Son of perdition ! the Churches of Christ cannot 
fellowship it, or receive any of its acts, 53 

LETTER VI — Methodism an accident— The first chapter of the Discipline 
revised— Its statements at variance with facts— Methodists who trust to it 
are deceived— Mr. Wesley was opposed to Episcopacy— Did not believe in 
three Orders, gg 

,ETTER VII.— The first Chapter of the Discipline wholly untrue— Meth- 
odists are Deceived who believe it— Methodist History and John Wesley 
against it— John Wesley did not believe an Episcopal Bishop a Scriptural 
Order in the Ministry— He himself would prefer to be called a knave, rascal, 
or scoundrel, than Bishop— The direct Testimony of Bishop Bascom, D D., 75 

LETTER VIII.— Methodism as it was— Its origin and design to study the 
Classics— Methodism without either Altar or Divinity— Its members and 
preachers all Unconverted— Wesley's Conviction and Conversion— His Ex- 
perience—A serious question : Who may be said to be the originator and 
instigator of the works and devices of wicked men ? 99 

(9) 



X CONTENTS. 

LETTER IX.— Methodism In Georgia in 1736— John and Charles Wesley 
sail for G-eorgia to convert the Indians, and to plant Methodism in America 
— Trouble on shipboard — Immersion of Mary "Welch — Mr. "W.'s admission — 
Difficulty on land— Mrs. Parker's child— Mr. "Wesley charged by his brother 
of being quarrelsome — Trouble with a lady — Mr. "Wesley a rejected lover — 
His revenge— Is apprehended, tried, and condemned— Flees from justice, and 
leaves Savannah by night— Seeks the sea-coast, and sails for England, . . 102 

LETTER X.— Methodism not necessarily a Christian Society — May be com- 
posed of sinners alone, preachers and members, as at first — Capt. Foy the 
inventor of Class-Meetings, Class-Leaders, and Stewards— A Catechetical 
Review of the facts of this letter, Ill 

LETTER XL— "Methodism as it is"— Introduction, 122 

LETTER XII. — Methodism began in America by a woman — Mr. "Wesley 
falsely charged with forming an Episcopal Church, and ordaining Coke a 
Bishop— Methodist Episcopacy originated by fraud and forgery— Methodists 
know not whetherBishops are Bishops or Elders— Divided among themselves, 128 

LETTER XIII.— Methodism claims for Mr. Wesley, and for its Bishops, the 
"divine right of kings" — That Mr. "Wesley founded the Methodist Church in 
America, and the Bishops rule it, by the "special grace of God"' — Method- 
ism still holds and teaches the Popish doctrine of Order and Succession ! . 143 

LETTER XIV.— The politics of Methodism, 153 

LETTER XV.— Methodism a Great Iron 'Wheel— a Clerical Despotism— and 
yet American Christians tolerate and support it, ..... 159 

LETTER XVI.— Methodism the Popery of Protestantism— as absolute and 
all-controlling as Jesuitism— Papal Bishops, ... . 169 

LETTER XVII.— A Methodist Bishop the Pope of Protestantism— His over- 
whelming despotic powers, 182 jj 

LETTER XVIII.— Methodist Presiding Elders— Sub-Bishops— Their irre- 
sponsible and oppressive Powers, -. 195 

LETTER XIX.— The Travelling Preacher— the allegiance required— The 
duties imposed — The servants of servants — Tetin their turns allowed to ex- 
ercise great authority over the rights of the laity — The class-leaders and 4th 
wheel, or stirrers— Stewards — An important question, "Do not the clergy, 
the rulers of Methodism, belong to a Church by themselves, the Annual 
Conferences, or Preacher's Church, into which no layman can enter — a 
Church within a Church ?" .... 207 

LETTER XX.— Local Preachers— What they forfeit in locating— Strong con- 
siderations to keep them in saddle— They are degraded— The petty oppres- 
sion to which they subject themselves— Loss of influence, . . . 225 



CONTENTS. xi 

LETTER XXI.— The Roman Catholic features— The doctrine of the Power 
of the " Keys" held by the Methodist Clergy in common with the Pope— 
The Divine right to govern held by the Methodists in common with the 
Pope and Priests of Rome — Methodist Ministers claim the power to admit 
into, and exclude from their societies, whomsoever they please, and the 
Discipline grants them the power, 234 

LETTER XXII.— The principle of the " Key Power" still further examined— 
It involves the Romish Dogma of Apostolic Succession and Infallibility — All 
Protestant Church Polities are administered in accordance with this Doc- 
trine—Protestants cannot successfully combat the Papacy, .... 247 

LETTER XXIII.— The influence of power and rank upon Ministers of the 
Gospel is pernicious — Promotes ambition, &c, 266 

LETTER XXIV.— The Episcopacy and the People— Dedicated to American 
Methodists — The Principles of legitimate Governments — Man's inalienable 
Rights — They cannot be conceded or alienated without Sin — They cannot 
be usurped without Impiety — What is a Tyranny and a Despotism, accord- 
ing to Bishop Bascom ? — Methodism proven to be a Tyranny, a clerical Des- 
potism, Anti- American in its Genius and Tendency — Republicanism back- 
wards— A New Definition of Methodism, and an Illustration, . . .276 

LETTER XXV.— Is Methodism Republican ? ....... 308 



PART II. 

LETTER XXVI.— The peculiar Doctrines and Usages of Methodism— "A 
Calvinistic Creed, a Popish Liturgy, and an Arminian Clergy," . . .827 

LETTER XXVII.— The Discipline— Its Popish Liturgy— Its Marriage Service 
borrowed from the Romish Chureh— The Mummeries of Rome Protestant- 
ized, .... 336 

LETTER XXVIII.— The Popish features of the Discipline— Unscriptural 
terms of admission — The Societies used as drag-nets to sweep the world into 
the Methodist Church, 845 

LETTER XXIX.— Seekership— Its unscripturalness— Its pernicious tendency 
—The testimony of a Presbyterian, 852 

LETTER XXX. — Inconsistencies — Admitting acknowledged sinners into the 
Church, and debarring for six months an acknowledged Christian from en- 
tering! — Giving baptism by force to non-believing children and unconscious 
infants, and refusing baptism to the professed Christian for six months ! . 866 

LETTER XXXI.— The Class-meeting law— An essential feature of Method- 
ism — Exclusion the penalty for its violation — Is confessedly a commandment 
of men— To submit to it is to obey and serve men, 378 



384 



Xli CONTENTS. 

LETTER XXXII.— Band-meeting*— Virtually confessionals— Sinful thoughts 
must be confessed to the Preacher— Their tendency— The opinions of Pres- 
byterians, 

LETTEE XXXIII.— The Proselyting features of Methodism— The Influence 
of the Class-leader— Aid, patronage, and suffrage offered to all who will 
either join or " groan"— A popish feature, &c— How Presbyterians regard it, 403 

LETTEE XXXIV. — Baptism— Methodists have two distinct " baptisms," one 
for infants and one for adults — A distinct and different office for each—A 
distinct and altogether different design for each— The regeneration of infants 
in baptism in all cases, plainly taught in the Discipline and standard works 
of the Book Concern, 415 

LETTEE XXXV.— Adult Baptism distinct from infant— Its design, with the 
exception — No faith required of the adult, save that required by the Eomish 
Church — And no profession of regeneration as a condition of baptism — Re- 
generation ordinarily the same with baptism, 423 

LETTEE XXXVI.— Infant baptism in a New Light— Tried by the Creed, 
the Catechism, and the Eitual, and condemned by the word of God— Thirty 
untruths taught in the baptism of one infant, . . . . . . 436 

LETTEE XXXVII.— The action of baptism— The Discipline acknowledges 
immersion as a scriptural act of baptism — It is so admitted in the older 
standard works published by the Methodist " Book Concern" — Mr. Wesley 
admits immersion to have been the primitive action in his Journal, in his 
Notes on N. T. — Adam Clark — Benson — And yet it is pronounced an un- 
scriptural and indecent action in other works published by the Book Con- 
cern, and by the whole Methodist press In the South— Admissions of two 
Presbyterians, two Catholics, and two Episcopalians, 451 

LETTEE XXXVIII.— The Methodist terms of communion— None so close, 
or bo unscripturally close— They invert the ordinances and violate the divine 
order— The Discipline forbids Methodist preachers to invite members of 
other denominations — All who commune with Methodists must not only 
believe, but dress like them — Clo3e communion in marrying — In trading, in 
Sabbath-Schools, in Singing-Schools, and "Tune Books" — Baptist com- 
munion not close— The testimony of Mr. Hibbard, Mr. Griffin, . . .470 

LETTEE XXXIX.— The " Calvinism" of the Creed and the Arminianism of 
the Clergy — The "Articles of Eeligion" Calvinistic— They preclude the idea of 
the ultimate apostasy of the believer — The ground of Justification examined 
— The Scriptural argument — The Methodist Clergy preach against their own 
creed, as well as teachings of Holy Scripture — Revival and Camp-meeting 
excitements— The Foctrine of Apostasy made necessary— The tendency of 
such teaching and doctrine is to make infidels , 500 

LETTEE XL.— Primitive Church Constitution— Eepublicanism and Chris- 
tianity Direct, . 544 



%\t (great fen Htel 



INTRODUCTORY LETTER. 



To J. Soule, Senior Bishop of the M. E. Church, South. 

Dear Sir . — Should the inquiry arise in your mind, or the 
mind of the reader of these letters, why they were written, 
or why addressed to^yourself 1 I answer, I am prompted to 
write them in order to place myself in my true position 
before the public, and to convince the Christian world that 
I have, as has every Christian minister of the gospel and 
religious editor, sufficient and weighty reasons for opposing 
the religious system denominated " Methodism." Nothing 
but an ardent desire that truth, and truth alone, should pre- 
vail, moves me to oppose Methodism, or to address this 
series of letters to you. 

During the past six years, in the conscientious discharge of 
my duty as a minister, and the Editor of a religious Journal, 
I have repeatedly weighed serious objections against many of 
the doctrines and peculiar features of Methodism, and, almost 
in every instance, I have been charged with misapprehension, 
or gross misrepresentation of its doctrines and polity, without 
receiving, when I have most respectfully and repeatedly 
1 & (9) 



10 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

sought it, the light, either to correct my errors, or the proof 
to satisfy me of the alleged injustice done. 

I have, for years past, earnestly wished to examine the 
scriptural claims, polity and influence of the system of Me- 
thodism, in a calm, candid manner, with one whose confidence 
in its heavenly origin, and divine sanction would qualify him 
to do so with equanimity of temper and a Christian spirit. 

It is a time-attested axiom, that truth loses nothing, but 
gains every thing from examination. I propose nothing, 
therefore, which you can possibly construe into an insulting 
and injurious attack upon your system — if you regard it 
founded in truth, and sustained by divine authority — but on 
the other hand, a course that will afford you an opportunity 
to correct the erroneous views (if they be erroneous) enter- 
tained concerning your peculiarities, by a majority of those 
not intimately connected with your societies, and thus to aid 
materially in recommending and disseminating them. 

I have chosen to address this series of letters to you, in 
preference to any other person for several reasons. 

1st. You are the senior Bishop of your society South; I 
believe the senior of all Methodist Bishops in America. 

2d. As I have intimated, all previous attempts to discuss 
the peculiar features of your system with the conductors of 
your press or the leaders of your party, have been met, not 
with reason and proof, but with derision and personal abuse. 
In every instance the arguments have been left for the man, 
since it was far easier to abuse the latter than to answer the 
former. Rome served her heretics thus. I greatly mistake 
you, if you are capable of such a course. 

3d. I have respectfully and repeatedly requested informa- 
tion touching sundry parts of your system and denomina- 
tional usages, best known to its originators, legislators, and 
executors, but have been answered with insult and scorn ; 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 11 

and consequently I have been left to misrepresent you to 
the world, unintentionally, if I have indeed misapprehended 
any part of your polity. 

This ought not to be so. The different religious denomi- 
nations ought to understand each other's polity and doctrines 
perfectly, that they may agree, where agreement is possible. 
It seems to me far better to endeavor to dimmish our real 
differences, and seek approximation by calm and friendly dis- 
cussion, and the abandonment of all unscriptural tenets, than 
to increase the distance by misapprehension of our views. 

4th. I address you, sir, because you now fill, and have for 
years filled the highest office in your Church, as one of its 
" chief ministers" and the oldest successor of Wesley, — a 
position of great trust and fearful responsibility ! You cer- 
tainly will not bring a reproach upon your office, if you have 
no respect for your own personal character, with an unbe- 
coming reponse. 

5th. It is, furthermore, presumable that no one in your 
connection is better acquainted with the origin, history, 
genius, usage and influence of American Methodism than 
yourself, since its years and your own are equal, and you 
are happily endowed with the talent of clearly expressing 
your ideas, when it is your pleasure to do so. 

6th. I address you, sir, because, if you reply, you will 
doubtless do so in all candor, and in the fear of God, since the 
hoar frost on your head, and your trembling frame admonish 
you that in a few days more, you must stand before that so- 
lemn bar and give an account of your bishopric — of all you 
have taught, and enjoined upon men to teach and observe. 

Judgirig from your time of life, you must have entered 
into the confines of Bunyan's Beulah land — the place of all 
others best fitted for calm reflection and an honest retros- 
pection of your past life, so that whatever of error you have 



12 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

taught or countenanced, you can correct before you are call- 
ed to pass the dark waters of the river that rolls before you, 
and upon whose very margin your feet already now tread. 

If, upon a final examination of your teachings, you find 
nothing to correct, you will be afforded the privilege of put- 
ting the seal of conclusive scriptural proof upon them, which 
your knowledge of God's Word, acquired by the study and 
experience of more than a half century, qualifies you to do 
as well as any man now living, and thus you will be able to 
close a long life by sealing your course and teaching with its 
gathered fruits. 

But should you decline entering upon the defence of your 
system, and should you find nothing in these letters to which 
you think successful contradiction can be urged, you will not 
be expected to reply, — your silence will be considered an all- 
sufficient consent to the correctness of the facts they contain. 

Truly, those who do not consider you as ambitious in 
your aims, must acknowledge you sincere in your creed. 
You have given the vigor of youth, the strength of manhood, 
and the weakness of age to the extension of your system. 
From the Alleghanies to the Gulf, what mountains have 
you not crossed, mid summer's heat and winter's cold, what 
streams have you not forded or swam, what defiles have you 
not threaded, what fatigues have you not endured or dangers 
braved in the devious steps of your elevation, from a labor- 
ious preacher to the almost imperial office and power you 
now fill and sway. By the dint of native talent and uncon- 
querable perseverance you have forced your way from 
obscurity to your present place of honor, of tremendous 
influence, yet awful responsibility. You cannot, if the man- 
hood of mind remains, look with contempt upon any one, 
however humble, or assume a weight of dignity to avoid 
noticing arguments which you are convinced are not in your 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 13 

power to answer. You leave all such tricks to self-important 
brainless clergymen, and new-made doctors of divinity. Man 
is only man's equal, and neither a salary nor a factitious posi- 
tion can make him more than the equal of his contemporaries. 

But alas, sir, how fearful to you now would be the 
thought, that you have exhausted the whole of life, hazarded 
all those dangers, underwent all those toils to advance the 
interests of an organization, not instituted by Jesus Christ, 
or authorized by his word — but a mere human, man-devised 
system — a rival fold, whose very being and advancement is 
hostile to, and subversive of, the Church and Kingdom of Christ, 
set up by him and designed to fill the whole world ! What 
an awful thought for an aged minister about to die, that he 
has spent his long life and exhausted all his mighty powers 
of mind and body in opposing the Kingdom of Christ, and 
diverting those seeking to enter it into a rival organization, 
which, becoming universal, would blot out the doctrines, 
constitution, and very being of Christ's Church from the 
world ! ! What a soul-piercing thought would this be — the 
very fear of which is quite sufficient to deter you from har- 
boring a reflection or engaging in an examination that might 
lead to it. But, what will error, however sincerely be- 
lieved, avail a man upon a bed of death or at the bar of the 
Great Judge ! ! The truth alone can save us. 

And are you prepared, sir, to say there is not the least 
possibility that a candid and prayerful examination of your 
discipline, by the light of God's Word, would force that 
thought upon your mind % Are there not more than two 
millions and a half of professed Christians in this Union, who 
look upon you as in gross error, and misleading others 1 
and among this number scores, and indeed, thousands distin- 
guished as the best scholars and most pious Christians of 
this age? 



14. THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

I do not urge this consideration as sufficient of itself for 
you to renounce your creed, but is it not enough to exhort 
you to examine once more, candidly and prayerfully, ere you 
leave the world, the doctrines and polity of your society, and 
decide with the Word of God in your hands and your eye 
upon his Bar, whether Methodism was originally " set up" 
by Christ, and conformed in organization, doctrines, mem- 
bership, laws, offices, and usages, to the Divine Pattern and 
Model given by Christ ? 

Such an examination can do you no harm, and it may be 
of incalculable advantage to you, and to the millions of your 
followers, both in this world and in the world to come. 

If an examination should convince you of your mistake, 
you have already far too little time to counteract your past 
influence, and pull down what you have spent a half century 
in building up. If you have labored nearly a whole life 
under a mistake, you owe much to the world, and much to 
your God, before you are prepared to leave the one or to 
meet the other. If your society is not a Christian Church, 
i. e., a scriptural one, and set up by Christ, it is an Anti- 
christian organization — being opposed, to Christ's teaching 
and the extension of his church in the world — and should 
you judge yourself by the rule you judge others, you would 
decide a life spent, however sincerely, in establishing the 
doctrines and kingdom of Antichrist, is illy prepared to " pass 
that solemn test :" " Have ye done all things whatsoever J 
have commanded," and receive the " Well done, good and 
faithful servant." 

Ignorance cannot be plausibly urged, since there is little 
excuse for ignorance in this age of Bibles. Sincerity in 
error can be pleaded by the blindest idolater. 

Your broadest charity hardly admits a Loyola or a Xa- 
vier to a Christian's heaven : and who more sincere than they, 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 15 

if a long life of toil and sacrifice sufficiently attest sincerity ! 
The fact that a man or society has accomplished a large 
amount of good is not sufficient to prove that he is a Chris- 
tian, or that such a society is a Church of Christ, or entitled 
to the name of Church. If so, we might canonize heathen 
philosophers and modern sinners, and pronounce our Bible 
and Tract Societies scriptural churches of the Lord Jesus. 
The Eomish Apostacy has accomplished much good, and 
the church of Luther in his day vastly more, yet the former is 
the Man of Sim and the latter a manifest ' : harlot " — the fruit- 
ful mother of infidelity, and the curse and bane of religion 
in Germany. A man or society, propagating a wrong sys- 
tem or practice, always does inconceivably more evil than 



I drop these remarks to correct the impression that "it 
matters little what we believe so we are sincere, and there 
is no doubt about a man's salvation if he has done a great 
deal of good." We are saved by grace through faith — by 
faith in, manifested by obedience to, Jesus Christ. We must 
believe the proper facts, and certainly, to manifest our love 
and fidelity to Christ, we must obey the commands he has 
required at our hands : not those we ourselves institute, or 
others may impose upon us. 

I offer one more reason for addressing you. In age, in 
experience and knowledge of divine things, you are a father 
— one able to impart instruction in the proper spirit, and 
when you look into the open grave at your feet, I must 
conclude from the proper motive. You have lived long 
enough for yourself, and have reached a position in your 
society sufficient to satisfy the loftiest ambition; nothing 
should now interest you so much as the welfare of religion, 
the salvation of sinners, and to meet God in peace. A few 
days hence and creeds and parties will concern you no more. 



16 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

Can you do nothing even now to unite Christians and bless 
the world? 

Look at the distracted state of Christendom — look at Ten- 
nessee and the south-west ! What a spectacle ! The so- 
called Christian churches armed in bitter hostility ! Me- 
thodists and Baptists engaged in an exterminating warfare. 
Presbyterians and Methodists in East and West Tennessee 
unchurching and unchristianizing each other, and pronounc- 
ing each other's peculiar doctrinal teaching dangerous to the 
souls of men ! * Will Tennessee or the world ever be 
christianized so long as this state of things exist *? Will the 
world ever believe on Christ % If all the world were this 
day converted and banded under the colors of these hostile 
parties would it be a millennium % Peace would no more 
be restored than now, since opposites and contradictories 
must of necessity antagonize. The state of things as it now 
exists is frightful. But storms of tenfold fury await the 
years to come. What we now feel is but the breathings of 
a zephyr in comparison to the whirlwind that is rushing 
upon us. The great questions of this age are, " Which of 
all the claimants is the true Church of Christ % Ought Christ 
Jesus alone to be obeyed in religious matters, or may the 
authority of Bishops and Elders be regarded V 

The contest, in a word, is between Bible-/sm and man-es??i. 
You are as well convinced — you know as well as myself, and 
the world shotdd know, that all the ten or twelve so called 
evangelical, yet conflicting denominations cannot be the 
churches of Christ, equally scriptural in doctrine, polity and 
practice. 

Two, much less a dozen, contradictory propositions cannot 

* I allude to the pamphlet publications of Annan, Musgrave, Ross, 
Graves, (0. S. Pres.) Burrows, (C. P.) and McFarland, (Meth.) 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 17 

be equally true ! If Christ set up a visible kingdom, or 
build a church, which he came to do, as well as to suffer, he 
must have given it a definite organization — he must have 
given either a rule or an example — directions or a pattern 
for its building and government. It is therefore certain, if 
any one of all the ten denominations is justly entitled to the 
name Christian, only one is, or can be, since they are all dis- 
similar — radically opposite and subversive of each other. 

If the Methodist E. societies are churches of Christ, scrip- 
tural organizations, Baptists' churches are not. The former 
or the latter are manifestly in gross error. 

The history of the past few years, and the present posture 
of affairs, convince you that the principles and practices of 
our relative societies fiercely antagonize. The kingdom of 
Christ is not thus divided against itself. Both are not — 
cannot be scriptural, or gospel churches. 

The mechanic well knows that two, or twenty things, cut 
after the same pattern, will be alike. The mathematician 
tells us that " things equal to the same thing are equal to 
each other." If our churches were organized according to 
the Divine direction and pattern, would they not be in all 
respects similar, and we be one people — in one fold and 
under one shepherd 1 

To bring this serious and solemn subject to our own 
" business and bosoms." If I am right, you are wrong ; if 
you are right, I am wrong. If you are following Christ, I am 
serving Antichrist, and vice versa, since we are opposing 
each other and pulling down what the other builds ! A fol- 
lower and servant of Antichrist ! fearful, awful thought ! 
"Lord, is it I?" 

I make this appeal to you as a Christian, occupying life's 
honest place — the steps of the tomb. I beseech you in the 
name of Christianity, to tell me candidly wherein I err in 



18 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

regarding Methodism as an Antichristian organization. 
Convince me, I beg of you, of my error, if I am fighting 
against Christ. Expose before me and the world the errors, 
if I err, that I am spending life and treasure to disseminate. 
If you refuse, when you have it in your power to correct 
and undeceive me, will you not have to answer for the evils 
you might have prevented % I profess to you, before all 
men, that I will give you a heart honest, I trust, and open 
to the convictions of truth. Should you not see fit to respond, 
the w r orld shall be satisfied that it is not because the lan- 
guage or spirit of these letters is offensive or unchristian, or 
that the matter contained in them is of little moment. 

Your replies shall be faithfully printed in this paper,* 
whether your own journals reciprocate the favor or not. 

Yours with due respect, 

J. R. Graves. 



* The % Tennessee Baptist," published in Nashville, Tennessee, in 
which these letters originally appeared. 



LETTER II. 



Methodism cannot justly be called a Church of Christ, because 
too young by 1747 years — it being only 68 years old. 

Dear Sir : — Genealogical tables have, I believe, in this 
country, fallen into disrepute, indeed are, for many potent 
reasons, very obnoxious to American sovereigns, whose 
blood is an adulterous compound of that of every nation of 
earth. Few of our proudest families would have their 
genealogy published, since it might disclose facts that would 
be considered disgraceful and ruinous to the prospects of its 
members. Many of our " blood royals" would in two or 
three back steps land into a cellar or poor house. Many a 
puffy aristocrat, who now affects to overlook honest poverty 
and industrious mediocracy, would be introduced to a father 
who followed the honest calling of " organ" or " sausage" 
grinder, or his genealogy in this respect might be like that 
of the King of Salem ! Owing to the uncertain direction of 
lineal descent, gentlemen of this day usually ignore their 
genealogy altogether. 

Yet, sir, to be able to establish a connection with, and 
direct descent from, an ancient family, is a matter of the 
highest importance in establishing a claim to an entailed 
estate, and sometimes even the simple age of the claimant 
determines a decision. 

For example, Lord A. dies, and leaves his estate to his 

(19) 



20 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

youngest son, B. Now C. D. and F. appear in court, and 
each claim to be the veritable youngest son of A., and they 
establish several points of similarity. Now in two ways 
can their claims be decided. Let the clerk call upon them 
to swear to their ages. C. affirms his age to be 20, D. his 
to be 25, and F. 30. Now the old family record is brought 
into court, and from that the court learns that the youngest 
son of Lord A. was born A.D. 1790, and if now living, 
would be 62 years old ; would not the testimony of those 
claimants prove them to be impostors % 

But suppose their ages correspond, when we come to cross- 
examine them as to their family connections, the court learns 
that no blood relaiionskijy ever existed between their families 
and that of Lord A. ; but that they sprung from a family of 
a similar name, and a most bitter enemy of that of Lord A.'s. 
Would not this fact both disprove their claim and dishonor 
the claimants'? 

Suppose Lord A. had been dead for a century, and the 
estate was now to be divided among his legal heirs, would 
not each claimant be required to establish his blood rela- 
tionship to show it? If he foiled to prove consanguinity, 
his claim would be null ; but if from his own testimony he 
proves himself to be of another family, his imposture would 
be manifest. Thus we see age often, and descent, ever 
constitutes a matter of the highest importance in establishing 
claims to an entailed estate. 

Your quick perception has already apprized you of the 
force of this illustration against the claim of your Society. 
Christ came to set up a kingdom, not of this world, and 
such as the world had never seen. He fulfilled at his death 
his mission. He himself declared a few hours previous to his 
crucinxion, that he had " finished the work the Father had 
given him to do ;" and upon the cross he exclaimed, " It is 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 21 

finished !" If to " set up a kingdom./' or in his own lan- 
guage, " build a Church," was a part of his work, he must 
have finished it before his death, because, after the giving 
of the Supper, we can learn no new law enacted, no new rite 
or ordinance given, but simply the information that the doc- 
trines and laws of his kingdom, as he had taught ikem, 
involved in the term " Gospel" were to be taught to, and 
enjoined upon all nations ; and also he promised to aid and 
empower them with the Holy Spirit, who should bring all 
his teaching to their remembrance, and vindicate the divinity 
of their mission by " signs and miracles following." 

As the temple was finished before it was dedicated to 
worship by the visible descent of the Spirit, so the Church 
of Christ was finished before it was, dedicated to the work of 
the world's evangelization by a visible manifestation of the 
Spirit. The Church of Christ was organized during the en- 
trance of his ministry, and not only the prophets, but Christ 
himself distinctly foretold that it should not be destroyed, but 
should stand and be perpetuated through successive and 
multiplied churches until it filled the whole world. When 
a religious sect, therefore, stands claimant to the heirship of 
this most glorious inheritance of perpetuity, it becomes posi- 
tively necessary for it to exhibit indisputable proofs of at 
least two facts — 1st, Relationship ; 2nd, Structural Identity : 
either of which answers to blood. 

I mean by relationship, that the religious people, so claim-, 
ing, must establish the fact of the existence of a similar 
people to themselves, holding and teaching similar doctrines 
and principles of Church polity, during the Apostolic period 
(A. D. 100,) and by the apostles recognized as Christians : 
and also from this period down through succeeding centuries, 
until the present, so far as the imperfect records of Ecclesi- 
astical and civil history allow ; 1 say imperfect, since there is 



22 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

not extant an entire history of even the Roman Empire, pos- 
sessing the advantages it did of almost countless his- 
torians. 

This letter is devoted to the impartial examination of the 
claims of your system of Methodism to be recognized as a 
legitimate heir to the title, consideration and inheritance of 
a Church of Christ. 

Suppose it brought into court ; I have nothing to do but 
to allow my counsel to ask its age, and it will decide its 
own fate. 

Counsel. — What is your age % 

Methodism.— May it please your lordship [it betrays its 
English parentage,] I was conceived in the year of our Lord 
1729, and born Anno Domini 1739, in England, and chris- 
tened with my present name in America, A. D. 1784, and 
just sixty-eight years ago last June.* 

Counsel. — Did you ever hear or read in your family re- 
cords of a family of your name living prior to 1729, to 
whom you are related 1 ? 

Methodism. — Never one of my name existed before, as I 
can learn from any source, and no pains have been spared, I 
assure you, in the investigation. My lineage is established 
by the most satisfactory and irrefragable proofs. My mo- 
ther is the Church of England, the oldest daughter of the 
Holy Catholic Church of Rome, which is undoubtedly a 
scriptural (?) Church, since she is distinctly mentioned, and 
her history given in the Scriptures ! (see Rev. xiii.) My 
parents, on my father's side, were John and Charles Wesley, 
Fletcher, Coke and Asbury, and several others, who put in 
a joint claim to the honor of my paternity, although by 
common consent it now passes in the name of John Wesley, 



* This was written in 1852. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 23 

my mother's priest, and is so entered upon the family re- 
cords. 

The counsel shows that Methodism has decided its own 
case against itself. 

1st. Because, according to its own testimony, it lacks full 
1747 years of being old enough, to heir under the law ; and, 
2nd, That its descent, instead of being from the honorable 
lineage of the martyred "Saints" and primitive "witnesses 
of the truth," is directly the reverse — from the blood of 
their murderers — the woman clothed in scarlet who put the 
saints to death, and made herself drunk with their blood, 
and whose descendants (of whom Methodism declares her- 
self to be one) Christ denominated " harlots'" and the " abo- 
minations of earth" and the mother and her family he also 
called Mystical "Babylon" 

T am not treating this subject in a light or trifling manner, 
although the above may excite a smile. No, sir, I would 
rather move a tear than a smile — a prayer than a laugh. 
This subject is too grave, too momentous for trifling ! it is 
serious and deplorable as the divisions of Christendom, and 
fraught with as awful consequences. The half score of anta- 
gonistic sects all claiming to be Christian Churches, are in- 
tensely engaged making partizans to extend and strengthen 
themselves by numbers, and thus enlisting the whole world 
under their hostile banners — for hostile they are, and hostile 
they must be, because opposite and contradictory, and oppo- 
sites must antagonize. 

Christendom is precipitated into a fierce and deadly con- 
flict ; thus presenting to the world the sad and paradoxical 
spectacle of Christian Churches (admitting the title they 
claim) divided, and warring against themselves, and if they 
are indeed of one household " they cannot stand." The 
friendly alien is astonished and " offended" — sceptics laugh 



24 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 



and devils rejoice ! Will America ever become a Christian 
nation while this state of things continues ? But this is not 
all. This conflict is exported by American missionaries, 
and imported into heathen lands. The strife for preeminence 
has already begun there between Baptists and Pedobaptists, 
and between Pedobaptists themselves. Oriental and occi- 
dental breezes waft to our ears the " clash of arms and the 
clangor of war." Which of these contradictory sects are the 
heathen to believe, Episcopalians, Catholics, Methodists, Pres- 
byterians, Baptists or Campbellites 1 Will they ever in great 
numbers receive the gospel while this state of things continues | 
Will the world ever believe on Christ until his followers are 
one, in regeneration of heart and one in church organization 1 
The conflict will never end there until ended here at its source, 
and it will never end here until these claims to Church 
legitimacy are settled, and all united upon the original and 
divine New Testament model, taking the Testament alone 
for our Liturgy, our Book of Common Prayer and Psalter, 
our Confession of Faith and our Discipline. 

I have instituted the above illustration to elucidate the prin- 
ciples or rules of decision by which I propose to examine 
the claims put in by your Society, and by which I am will- 
ing you should try my own.* 

Let me now briefly establish the correctness of the above 
rules and principles. 

I boldly take the position that the Christian Church was 
visibly set up (and consequently, must have had a definite^ j 
organization, laws, ordinances, &c.) previous to the ascension ! 



* If any one doubts the existence of a people, holding the princi- 
ples of Baptists, from the days of John the Baptist until now, let him 
procure Orchard's History of Foreign Baptists, published by the Ten- 
nessee Publication Society, Nashville, Tennessee. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 25 

of Jesus Christ, and that Churches having an identical struc- 
tural organism, i. e., character of membership, polity, &c, 
must have succeeded them, not only through the apostolic 
period, A. D. 100, but down until the present time. This 
being true, no existing society is entitled to be called by the 
name of Christ, (which implies that Christ was the author of 
its polity,) unless identical in structure and belonging to this 
illustrious family of gospel Churches. 

When was the visible Church of Christ set up, i. e., in 
what period of the world was it originated and made mani- 
fest 1 

It matters not whether in the family of Adam or Noah, 
Abraham or at Pentecost, so far as the first objection I urge 
against the claims of Methodism is concerned. Neither 
Abraham nor Peter had ever heard of Methodism, or con- 
ceived the remotest idea of such a religious system • it com- 
menced, you yourself will confess, three thousand years this 
side of Abraham, and more than seventeen hundred this 
side of Peter's time. I answer the question here both to pre- 
serve the integrity of my plan and for future reference. 

It was not set up in the days of Abraham or David. 

1. We find no proclamation of its approach. 

2. No intimation of its existence — nothing in the shape 
of a Christian Institute the least resembling it. 

3. God gave to Abraham the promise that " in his seed," 
[which Paul says meant Christ, who was to arise out of the 
family of Abraham,] M all the nations of the earth should be 
blessed," and " his seed should possess the gates of his ene- 
mies." Here is Christ in promise, and the universality of 
the kingdom he was to set up " overcoming all his enemies." 

4. The Jewish commonwealth was no Christian Church, as 
Pedobaptists are wont to teach, because that was an imper- 
fect type— a dim shadow of Christ's true Church, and not 

2 



26 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

the very image. How in the name of reason could it be 
both type and antitype — the shadow and the reality at the 
same time ! It is to secure grounds for infantile rites that 
this Judaistic position is urged. How weak a cause that 
dares to abuse human reason and divine revelation, and ad- 
dress mankind as a race of idiots ! 

We pass down twelve hundred and sixty-eight years this 
side of Abraham, and hear the New Covenant from the hal- 
lowed lips of Jeremiah, and which Paul, in Heb. viii., declares 
to be the basis of the Church of the New Dispensation, 
which came to supercede the old faulty and fleshly covenant 
upon which rested , the Politico-Ecclesiastical system of the 
Jewish nation. Hear Paul's version of it : " For if that 
first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have 
been sought for the second. For finding fault with them he 
saith, (Jer. xxxi. 31,) " Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, 
when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel 
and the house of Judah. Not according to the covenant that 
I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by 
the hand and led them out of the land of Egypt, because 
they continued not in my covenant, and I regard them not 
saith the Lord : For this is the covenant I will make with 
the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord. I will 
put my laws into their minds, and write them in their hearts, 
and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a peo- 
ple : and they shall not teach every man his neighbor, and 
every man his brother, saying, know the Lord, for all shall 
know me from the least unto the greatest." God never had 
a visible people under this covenant previous to the preach- 
ing of the Harbinger. Every proper member in the Christian 
Church knows God, from the least to the greatest. Such was 
the character of every New Testament Church, and such of I 
every gospel Church at the present day. \ 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 27 

We pass over many other prophesies until we come to 
Daniel ii. 44, who prophecies of the setting up of a kingdom 
by the God of Heaven in the days of the fourth Universal 
Empire, which all writers admit was the Roman. It had not 
been in existence previous to Daniel's day, else he would 
not have spoken of it as to be set up at a period six hundred 
years in the future. 

I pass on down to Malachi, (iii. 1,) (four hundred years 
before the advent of the Saviour) who foretells his coming 
as " the messenger of the covenant" and promises to send a 
herald to announce his approach. 

I here close the examination of the Old Testament, and 
find no visible Christian Church set up. 

I open the New Covenant. The birth of Jesus is an 
nounced, and the voice of his herald is heard. It is in " the 
days of the Roman Kings, or Universal Roman Empire ! ! ! 

The new covenant is preached by John and by Christ. 
John's ministry belonged to, and was a part of Christ's. 
After the last Passover which he ate with his disciples, he 
instituted the Supper, (and it seems with it completed the 
setting up, and setting in order his kingdom). He took wine 
and said, " this is my blood, by which the new covenant is ra- 
tified.'''' — (Bloomfield's version.) His work is now finished. 
1 1 have finished the work thou gavest me to do and rise 
again." No change was made from his ascension until Pen- 
tecost, and nothing new was added to a Saviour's finished 
work upon that day. It only received its world-wide com- 
mission, and was endowed with the Spirit's power ; and 
Peter only declared the terms of admission to its blessings, 
as he had previously received them. 

But the Church of Christ was to be unchangeable and per- 
manent, and to perpetuate itself through succeeding Churches, 
and eventually " fill the whole world." 



23 THE GKEAT IKON WHEEL. 

The prophet Daniel declares this, " the God of Heaven 
shall set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed : and 
the kingdom shall not be left to other people, [no change in 
the character of its citizens or members,] and it shall stand 
forever." Daniel ii. 44. 

Christ also asserts the fact, " Upon this rock will I estab- 
lish my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against 
it." He did not mean it should not be assailed, but he did 
mean that it should not be broken up or destroyed — that it 
should exist, in spite of the malice and rage of hell, and stand 
through every age as the world's moral lighthouse — a faith- 
ful witness of the truth — and, finally, when its wilderness 
age was passed, should attain to universal empire. 

It was upon these plain unmistakable predictions I based 
my assertions, that the kingdom of Christ has existed entire 
and unchangeable, as the All-wise Founder finished it, from his 
day down to the present, and will go on more and still more 
gloriously, until it shall have redeemed a fallen world, and 
restored the rescued sceptre of its loyalty to the hands of 
the Prince of Peace ; and hence, every society claiming the 
title of Christian Church, must prove its identity with the 
Church at Jerusalem, and to have been so acknowledged 
during the Apostolic period, and to have been in existence 
in all subsequent ages, free of the blood of the saints. 

In the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles, we have the 
history of the Christian Churches down to the death of John, 
A. D. 100. But where shall we find their history for a 
period of 1260 years after? In their history given by 
Christ, called Revelations, of things which must shortly come 
to pass. 

In the 12th and 13th chapters, we have the history of the 
rise of the Red Dragon (Pagan Rome), and his conflict with 
the Church, and of his being cast out — which took place in the 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 29 

third and fourth centuries — and his subsequent persecution 
of the saints, v. 11, "And they overcame him by the blood 
of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony, and they 
loved not their own lives unto the death." That these 
Saints were not Methodists, you know as well as myself 
Such a people were not in existence until 1384 years after- 
wards ! 

In the 13th and 14th verses, we read of the flight of the 
Church, and of her being "hid" from her persecutors for 
' : a time and half a time." Could this have been the Metho- 
dist Society, sir 1 Was it ever pursued with death % was it 
ever hid from the face of its persecutors in the wilderness % 
Has it ever existed for a single day in comparative obscu- 
rity ? and has Rome ever been made drunk with the blood 
of its members ? Is any portion of its history obscured % 
By no means. Wesley we know, and Coke and Asbury 
we know, and every year of its entire, though ever-chang- 
ing history, for the space of 68 years ! It cannot boast of 
the honors and unmistakable characteristics of Christ's 
Church — the loss of one drop of blood, a beheaded saint, 
persecution, a flight, or having been hid from the rage of 
enemies for a season. 

No, Methodism never was persetused with the sword — it 
never was compelled to flee, unless it fled from America, in 
the person of its tory preachers, who escaped to England 
during the revolutionary war.* 

In the 13th chapter, we have the history of the seven 
headed and ten horned Beast, Papal Rome. 7th v. "And it 
was given unto him to make war with the Saints, and to 



* For proof of this fact, I refer to the highest Presbyterian autho- 
rities, as well as to the Methodist historians. — See Annan, Musgrave, 
and Life of Asbury. 



30 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

overcome them." In the 7th chap., a woman (a professed 
Church) arrayed in purple and scarlet (kingly attire), and 
decked with gold and stones, mounts this beast. This wo- 
man is the Catholic Church, "And upon her forehead was a 
name written, Mystery, Babylon the Great, the Mother 
of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth. And I 
saw the woman drunken with the blood of the Saints, and 
with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus." I here would sit 
like a child at your feet, and entreat you to answer me the 
following candid questions : 

1. This woman (Popery) is called " the mother of harlots 
and abominations." Who are the daughters of the Catholic 
Church, unless the various Pedobaptist sects? The Lu- 
theran, the Presbyterian, the Episcopalian Churches, are all 
branches of the Catholic Church — offshoots from it, and the 
Methodist a branch of the Episcopal. Are not these de- 
nominated harlots and abominations in the above passage 1 
I do not wish to insult you — for the question is a legitimate 
one, and I am in prayerful earnest. I so decide — I could 
not, with the stake before me, decide otherwise. I do most 
conscientiously believe it, and hence my reason as a religious 
editor and minister of Christ, in refusing to recognize your 
claims to the will of " Christian Churches," receive your or- 
dinances, or to recognize your preachers as official gospel 
ministers by inviting them into our pulpits. Am I wrong % 
If so, I entreat of you to inform my ignorance and illumine 
my darkness. I will give the proofs and reasons you may 
offer a most candid and prayerful consideration. 

2. Who were the saints and martyrs of Jesus, with 
whose blood the " Whore" was drunken % They could not 
have been your brethren, for Rome never shed a drop of 
Methodist blood ! ! Methodism, however, unfortunately for 
its valid title as a legitimate Church of Christ, but fortu- 



REPUBLICANISM BABKWARDS. 81 

nately, indeed, to save its blood, was born after this age of 
martyrdom.- Borne has not killed a Protestant since the birth 
of Methodism. 

Eome never was drunken with Protestant blood ! ! ! The 
followers of Luther, Calvin, and Henry the VIII., have shed 
as much Catholic blood as they ever lost by Catholic hands ! 
But Presbyterians and Episcopalians have shed Christian 
blood, and united with the drunken mother to shed Baptist 
Wood, and consequently compose a part of Babylon, Chap, 
xviii. 24, "And in her (Babylon) was found the blood of 
prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the 
earth," i. e., for the testimony of Jesus. Have not Pro- 
testants, in Europe and in England, united with Rome to 
shed Baptist blood % and have not Presbyterians and Epis- 
copalians stained this " hallowed ground " with the blood, 
and caused American prisons to groan with the sufferings, of 
my brethren % These heavens and this earth have been wit- 
nesses of our persecutions, wrongs, and bloodshed, suffered 
at their hands, for the testimony of Jesus — and each drop of 
that blood will yet arise in heroes to avenge it — by still 
more hold and faithful testimony to his dishonored and sadly 
perverted truth. 

But once more, Rev. vi. 9, " I saw under the altar the 
souls of them that were slain for the w T ord of God, and for 
the testimony which they held ; and they cried with a loud 
voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou 
not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the 
earth ? And white robes were given unto every one of them, 
that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellow- 
servants also, and their brethren that should be killed as they 
were, should be fulfilled." 

Whoever these martyrs under the throne were, we are 
both agreed they were not Methodists. Methodism had not 



32 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

been conceived by Mr. Wesley when these cried! And 
it is further demonstrable, that no Methodist was ever be- 
headed for his attachment to the truth; never persecuted to 
death or to flight for his religion. He has a chartered privi- 
lege — apostacy — to avail himself of in such a case. These 
were saints, with whose blood, during the long nights of 
Papal persecution, the scarlet woman was drunken. Those 
saints were not Pedobaptist Protestants, for they have all 
(Methodists in their natural mother the Church of England) 
shed blood, and are included by the Saviour in the term 
Babylon. 

Having shown when the first Christian Church was set 
up, and its persecutions at the hands of Rome, Papal and 
Protestant, to continue 1260 years, and the bloody martyr- 
doms in which every existing Christian Church must have 
suffered through its preceding sister Churches (of which 
honors your people are deprived,) I now ask, how old is 
your society 1 Are you of yesterday, or of apostolic date ] 
I ask Mr. Wesley, and he tells me A. I). 1739, and that it 
never ought to claim to be a Church, yet fears his followers 
will make it one. I ask your Discipline, and the four 
bishops unite in answering me, 1739 as a society, and 1784 
as a Church. I ask all your historians, and all. all agree in 
the above dates. Did any similar organization precede you 1 
No, none. Neither history nor revelation intimates the ex- 
istence of such a society or polity. The " Wheel within a 
wheel " never made a revolution upon the sands of time, 
claiming to be a Church prior to 1784 ; the world never saw 
its like before. Truth forces me to decide, sir, that your 
claim to the title and consideration of a Christian Church is 
wholly groundless and invalid. Your organization is not old 
enough by 1747 years ! And more than this, the lineage of 
your society is very obnoxious and repugnant. Why, sir, 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 33 

modesty alone ought to forbid you to claim fellowship with 
the Churches of Christ ; and to the honor of Methodism be it 
said, it did not for many years presume to such a claim or 
consideration. According to your own frank admissions, 
your mother is the Episcopal Church, and this Church is 
called by Christ a harlot and an abomination, and your 
grandmother is the Church of Rome — the great whore and 
mother of harlots — also called Antichrist, which is the child 
of that old Serpent, the devil and Satan. 

I know these are offensive facts — unwelcome truths — but 
if the bare mention of them be offensive, how much more 
tEeir reality ? Is not the above your descent, and the above 
the age of your Methodist Church 1 If so, we cannot admit 
your claim, because Methodism is not old enough by more 
than seventeen centuries. 



2* 



LETTER III. 



" And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth."— Rev. xiii. 11. 

The system of Methodism cannot justly claim to be a Church 
of Christ, because of human origin — an invention of men. 

Dear Sir: — Were you asked if the economy of the 
Christian Church is of divine origin and appointment, you, in 
common with every other Christian, would answer, most, 
emphatically, yes. Nor would you recall the decision to 
qualify it, unless the ruin it brought upon your own system 
of church organization might occur to you. That the 
Church of Christ is of divine origin, and, as a visible Chris- 
tian institute, was set up at a definite time in the Christian 
era, every sect on earth feel forced to admit. Why, sir, 
in what light would a Protestant Christian be regarded in 
our day, who held and taught that the Christian Church was 
merely a human institution — a man-invented society or 
organization, like the institutions of Odd Fellowship and 
Masonry, and like them, subject to all the modifications of 
man's ever fluctuating and capricious fancy ! Would not 
Christendom unite in a holy crusade, against the sentiment 1 
Would not Christians regard such a doctrine as degrading 
the Church, and depreciating Church relationship to a level 
with membership in those societies ? 

(84) 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 85 

Now, Methodism, considered as a church or a society, is 
purely and clearly of human origin and device, and of a very 
recent date, — indeed, it cannot boast of as an illustrious 
a founder as Masonry, nor of as high antiquity, by some 
thousands of years. Solomon is claimed (I do not pretend 
to say it,) as the inventor of Masonry, and the cause of its 
organization, the building of the Temple ; while John 
Wesley, when an unconverted man, is the boasted founder of 
Methodism, and the cause of its being organized into a 
Church was the Revolutionary war ! ! 

Masonry has equal, yea, far superior claims to Methodism, 
to assume the title, and demand the regard and consideration 
of a Church of Christ ; and this cause, i. e., its human origin, 
constitutes my second objection to accord to Methodism the 
title and regard of Christian Church. 

My position may, and doubtless will be regarded by some 
unreflecting minds, as uncharitable in the extreme. But 
charity rejoices in the truth, and, I ask you, sir, and every 
candid man, to detect a flaw in the reasoning that forces me 
to this conclusion. Hate, if you will, but hear me. If 
Methodism is a mere human contrivance or " scheme" (for 
so some of your first writers have denominated it,) as are 
the above-named institutions, then, this fact of itself, decides 
that it can lay no claims to the regard and authority of a 
Christian Church, superior to them. Methodism may do 
good, and so do they, — many Methodists may be good men 
and Christians, and so are many Masons and Odd Fellows. 
Many sinners may have been converted under preachers in 
Methodist societies, and so have many sinners been con- 
verted under ministers who are members of Masonic and 
Odd Fellows' lodges, but bear it in mind, that neither 
Masonry nor Methodism ever saved or ever will save a soul. 

If a stream cannot rise higher than its source, then I cannot 



36 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

impart that of which I am not myself possessed. No more 
can a man clothe an institution or religious system of his 
own creation with authority superior to that of which he is 
himself possessed. The days of inspiration have passed, 
consequently one man has as good a right to invent a 
religious system as another, and to gain supporters to it as 
another has to his, and so each man, or each dozen men, 
might invent a dozen new " Churches," but each Church 
would possess no more authority or sanctity than the man 
himself possessed — and to repudiate these Churches would 
only be rejecting the works and inventions of men. For 
Christians to support such inventions or religious schemes, 
and observe the traditions and commandments of men for 
religious duties, is to be the followers and servants, yea, 
worshippers of men, for we are the servants of those whom 
we obey^ and the worshippers of him whom we serve. Man 
has most violently felt the force of this in all ages. Those 
who have arbitrarily given laws, civil or religious, to com- 
munities or nations, have either been inspired as Moses, or 
have pretended to be so, as did Minos, Lycurgus, Numa, 
Mahommet, down to Ann Lee and Joe Smith, &c, " be- 
cause," as said Milton, " they wisely forethought that men 
would never quietly submit to such a discipline, as had not 
more of God's hand in it than man's." Do not all monarchs 
and despots claim a " divine right" to. rule 1 

Indeed, was revelation silent as the grave upon the ques- 
tion, our reason, the intuitive convictions of our consciences, 
our sense of the moral fitness of things would decide the 
question beyond appeal. The arguments they, one and all, 
bring up, are weighty and conclusive, that the discipline or 
government of the Church of Christ is of divine appointment. 

(1.) Because it is the most important of all the externals 
of the Church or religion. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 37 

No one thing so determines the destiny of a nation or 
community as its government. A good government will 
conduct a nation to prosperity, and secure the welfare and 
happiness of its subjects, — while a bad one will sooner or 
later overwhelm it in ruin, and entail wretchedness and woe. 
Nothing, more than the laws and regulations of a society, 
concerns and influences a people's happiness and well-being. 
No nation or community can be truly prosperous with an 
ill-regulated government. Well said the immortal Milton, 
" Some do not think it for the ease of their inconsequent 
opinions, to grant that church discipline is platformed in the 
Bible, but that it is left to the discretion of men. To this 
conceit of theirs I answer, that it is both unsound and untrue ; 
for there is not that thing in the world of more grave and 
urgent importance throughout the whole life of man, than is 
discipline. What need I instance ? He that hath read with 
judgment, of nations and communities, of cities and camps, 
of peace and war, sea and land, will readily agree that the 
flourishing and decaying of all civil societies, all the move- 
ments and turnings of human occasions, are moved to and 
fro as upon the axle of discipline."* 

You will admit, sir, that the unity of all Christians, in 
faith and practice, is of the highest importance, since the 
world will never be persuaded to believe the gospel until 
Christians are one, (see Christ's prayer, John xvii.) Now a 
diversity of adverse forms of Church organizations separates 
Christians, and this engenders strifes, discord, emulation and 
hatred. They become identified in feeling and interest with 
the peculiar form of polity they have selected, and they are 
tempted to resort to all means to preserve it, promote its 
extension, and to resist the encroachments of a different one, 

* Milton's Works, page 29. 



38 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

and thus these diverse forms of Church polity precipitate all 
Christendom into a fierce and deadly antagonism. This 
state of things will never improve, infidelity be driven from 
the world, nor the heathen receive the gospel, until Christ- 
ians " see eye to eye and speak the same thing," and there is 
but " one fold and one shepherd." Now if Christ left the 
form of church polity to the discretion of man, one man or 
society of Christians has an equal right to frame a polity as 
another, and as each will see something to mend, we will, in 
the course of time, see as many different churches as there 
are ambitious men, able to draw off a party. It is this hor- 
rible God-dishonoring and Christ-rejecting doctrine that has 
already given birth to the 640 sects that have arisen, and it 
now stands forth, offering a free charter and encouragement, 
saying to unhallowed ambition that covets self-aggrandize- 
ment and notoriety, " You can found a church, and fix places 
of honor, authority, rule or profit for yourself and co- 
adjutors !" 

2. If Christ appointed any of the externals of his church, 
we are compelled to conclude he fixed the most important. 
To say he did not is to impeach his wisdom. 

The government of his Church is the most important of 
all externals, from every conceivable consideration. He 
must then have appointed it, by giving principles that would 
determine it, or giving a pattern of government in an organ- 
ized body. 

3. It would be not only an impeachment of his wisdom, 
to suppose he left that part of his Church to be devised by 
man, which if badly devised, would prove the subversion of 
his whole design, but it would reflect upon his goodness. 
" How can we believe that God would leave his frail and 
feeble, though not less beloved Church here below, to the 
perpetual stumble of conjecture and disturbance in this our 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 89 

dark voyage, without the card and compass of disci- 
pline?"* 

4. Such a supposition would make Christ a less desirable 
and less faithful lawgiver than Moses ! and Paul tells us he 
was more faithful.f Did not God charge Moses to make 
every part of the old tabernacle, which was only a shadow 
of the new and true house, according to the heavenly pattern, 
and is the glorious and really true house left to be shaped 
and patterned according to the thousand varying fancies of 
men, and like Methodism, subject to be changed , by every 
General Conference? 

Well said Milton, when he lifted his warning voice against 
the Episcopal Church framers of his day, " Did God take 
such delight in measuring out the pillars, arches and doors 
of a material temple % Was he so punctual and circumspect 
in lavars, altars and sacrifices, soon after to be abrogated, 
lest any of these should have been made contrary to his 
mind % Is not a far more perfect work, more agreeable to 
his perfections in the most perfect state of the Church mili- 
tant, the new alliance of God to man."J " God never in- 
tended to leave the government of his Church, delineated 
here, to be patched afterwards and varnished over with the 
devices and embellishings of man's imagination." No, the 
beneficent Saviour left this work not to the inventions or 
desecrations of men nor angels, but came down himself " to 
set up his kingdom," and not only published the principles 
of its constitution, but gave an example, and when leaving, 
solemnly charged his disciples, and through them his minis- 
ters in all ages, to see it, that they taught his followers to 
" observe all things whatsoever he had commanded," and 
this forbids the observance in religion or the Church, of any 
thing he has not commanded ! 

* Milton, page 29. f See Heb. iii. 2, 4. % Milton, page 30. 



40 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

5. The government must of necessity be a definite charac- 
ter to promote the highest welfare and happiness of the 
membership. All governments do not do this equally. All 
governments, save one, actually destroy the very inalienable 
rights with which the God of nature endowed man, and thus 
contravene the wisdom of God in man's creation. Who, better 
than God, knows the character of government that would be 
the best and certainly calculated to secure the greatest good 
of his children 1 ? 

6. No man, or class of men, has the wisdom and pre- 
science to devise such a government. It, of necessity, should 
partake of the character of the doctrines of religion — it 
needs to be a perfect one, and who but God is equal to this 
work? Let the history of human governments illustrate 
the weakness and inability of man to devise governments or 
organizations that have the strength to endure, and at the 
same time respect all the natural rights of man. 

7. If left to men, they would devise it so as to promote 
their own ends. Where is there an organization framed by 
men, civil or religious in which places of distinction, power 
or emolument, are not found 1 Look at Monarchism, Epis- 
copacy and Presbyterianism. What do we see? Kings, 
bishops and ruling elders, superior orders, lording it over 
God's children and Christ's heritage. They have made " right 
and left hand seats," because they wished to occupy them. 
" Of what excellency and necessity then Church discipline is, 
how far beyond the faculty of man to frame, and how dan- 
gerous to be left to man's inventions, who would be every 
foot turning it to sinister ends ; how properly also it is the 
work of God as father, and of Christ as husband of the 
Church."* 

* Milton's Works, Reason of Church Government, page 31. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 41 

8. If the government of the Church is left for the clergy, 
or any set of men to frame, then Christ put it in the power 
of men to oppress his children. They might, even uninten- 
tionally, frame a polity that would prove oppressive. 

9. Such a power delegated to ministers, would tend to 
foster their pride, and inflate them with the idea of their 
superiority to their brethren. 

10. If given to one man or class of men, it concedes the 
fact that there are superior and inferior classes or orders in 
the Church — those who determine the laws of the Church, 
and its regulations and practices, giving rites and cere- 
monies, &c. ; and it would teach that there are Rabbis, i. e., 
authoritative " teachers" or " masters" in the Church. 

11. Where, in the New Testament, has Christ or his apos- 
tles specified the person or persons who are to do this all 
important work 1 Whom has he empowered to determine 
the discipline, make and change laws for his kingdom'? 
Angels might as well presume to fix the laws that regulate 
the worship of the Church of the first-born in heaven, as 
Ministers, Bishops or Popes, to make and change the laws of 
Christ's kingdom on earth ! Your own Bascom has well said, 
" The right of deciding what are the will and mind of God, 
in matters of faith and discipline, by prescriptive interpreta- 
tion, is conceded in the Scriptures to no man or body of 
men, exclusively."* Bishop Bascom in this solitary passage, 
drives a dagger through and through the very vitals of Me- 
thodism. Does not a body of Methodist clergy — the Gene- 
ral Conference, claim the right, exclusively, to interpret, and 
even legislate proscriptively, " matters of faith and discip- 
line," for Methodism % Where then do you get your autho- 
rity for your proscriptive interpretation and legislation, if 

* Declaration of Rights, Art. 17. 



42 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

not from Christ? From John Wesley? How dare the 
General Conference change, add to, and take from the statute 
book of Jesus Christ — and the law book of his church and 
kingdom, every four years, if they do indeed consider the 
Methodist Episcopal Society the Church, or a part of the king- 
dom of Christ, and the Discipline its laws and polity 1 What 
insolent presumption ! What daring impiety ! ! That discip- 
line, and history, is a dark mountain of condemnation to 
Methodism ! ! 

12. My twelfth argument is: Man seems instinctively im- 
pressed that the disciplinary laws of the Church which com- 
mand his implicit obedience, on pain of his exclusion, are, 
and of right ought to be, as divinely appointed as baptism 
and the supper. 

If the impression on every man's conscience is any proof 
of the existence of a God, (and all writers use the argument,) 
it is equally in proof of the Divine appointment of Church 
discipline. 

13. But supposing the organization, discipline, laws, &c, 
of any given Church were of man's invention and enactment, 
no man could submit to them without serving man and re- 
jecting Christ. 

14. Finally and conclusively. If the visible organization 
of the Christian Church is of man's device, then it is not only 
of no moment what that form may be, but it is not neces- 
sary that there should be one at all ! Admit it to be man's 
work, then like all his other creations it is his creature — it 
belongs to him, and he has a perfect right to do with it as he 
pleases — it is subject to his own caprices, he can change its 
form, every year, or abolish it altogether. Each religious 
society now in existence, has as good a right to abolish 
its present polity as it had to create it, and suppose all 
should abolish their forms to-day, there would be no visible 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 43 

Church in the world, so far as they compose it. It is their 
privilege, whenever it is their pleasure, to do so. God has 
no where commanded them to make governments for him, 
and he no where forbids them, but rather every where com- 
mands them, to abolish their traditions. 

Do you feel prepared to advocate the legitimate conse- 
quences of Pedobaptistic positions upon this point ? What 
are they % If Christ gave no principles to be observed, and 
no directions, but left it open for all to satisfy their likings 
in Church making, then any man or woman may at any time 
invent and set up a society with a polity and discipline, yea, 
and membership too, to suit their fancy, and call it a Church 
of Christ, and call upon you, sir, to acknowledge it as such, 
and to commune with it, and, as you are a warm advocate 
for open communion, you could not object ! ! 



LETTER IY. 



An important principle — the Church of Christ is of Divine 
origin — founded by Christ in the days of the Ccesars — 
Methodism, by John Wesley in the days of George III. 

Dear Sir : — I will here lay down one single proposition, 
sustained by the plainest and most unmistakable declarations 
of Christ, upon which I rest the whole discussion. 

Proposition : If Christ gave no commandment how his 
Churches were to be governed, and his followers disciplined 
— if he gave no form of Church polity for our observance as 
Churches, then it would be Heaven-daring impiety in any 
man to presume to devise a form of polity, and teach and 
enjoin it upon Christians to observe ! ! 

The proof of the above is the last charge of Christ to his 
disciples, Matt, xxviii. 20, " Teaching them to observe all 
things whatsoever I have commanded you." Here is a 
specific law. It enjoins the teaching of a specific class of 
commands. That class is, all things that Christ himself had 
previously commanded, and of course nothing else. This 
forbade their teaching the commands of Moses or Elias, of 
Abraham or David, unless Christ himself had taught them 
also. J* is a fundamental principle of our common law, 
that where one thing is specified, every other thing is for- 

(44) 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 45 

bidden. " Exprcssio unius est exclusio alterius" The speci- 
fication of one thing is the exclusion of every thing else. This 
principle is the most important one in the civil code. It is 
well established and admitted throughout the civilized world. 
Nothing could be determined in law without it. Let us 
illustrate it by a few passages of scriptural examples. In 
the commission, Christ commands them to preach the 
"gospel." This forbade them to preach the ceremonial law, 
or any thing but the gospel, for salvation. He told them to 
baptize " into the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit." 
This specification positively forbade them to baptize into any 
other name, as Shem, Ham and Japheth. " He that believeth 
and is baptized." This as positively binds and limits bap- 
tism to the believer alone, because he is the only character 
mentioned in connection with baptism. So, " teaching them 
to observe whatsoever / have commanded," imperatively 
limits the teachings of the apostles, and Christ's ministers in 
every age, to what Christ had commanded at that time — 
previous to his ascension. I rest the whole controversy of 
Church-making on this one passage, and appeal to the bar of 
Tennessee for the soundness of my reasoning. This is the 
great law, governing Church discipline and polity. This is 
our " rocky Gibraltar," and we defy the combined attack of 
Popes Catholic and Popes Protestant. We challenge them 
all, big popes and little popes, scarlet cardinals, pompous 
prelates, grave benches of ruling elders, and solemn Method- 
ist Conferences, with Pio Nono of Rome, and the Archbishop 
of Canterbury of London, at their head, to gainsay the 
above proposition, or evade the prohibitory feature of this 
law — and if they cannot, they are ruined — their organiza- 
tions are all unscriptural and Antichristian ! We challenge 
contradiction ! That minister or bishop who teaches the 
observance of a solitary law, ?r " thing" which Christ did 



46 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL 

not command, and binds it upon the Church of Christ, 
violates this plain and solemn injunction, and tramples the 
authority of Jesus Christ under his unhallowed feet ! 

Reject this wise provision, this restrictive law of Christ, 
and you open wide a door and invite man within the temple 
for trade and traffic, and to do with it as he pleases. You offer 
a temptation to every designing and ambitious man and 
woman, as I have said above, to divide and distract Christen- 
dom with their parties and new-fangled churches, which they 
have invented and organized their followers into. Break 
down this' barrier to human pride, ambition, and presump- 
tion, and you are compelled to place human authority upon 
the same footing with Scripture. Yes, sir, I would be as 
much bound to observe your laws and traditions which you, 
in conjunction with your fellow bishops, have commanded 
in your testament and discipline, as I would be to obey 
Jesus Christ and the twelve apostles ! Would you like this 1 
It would flatter the pride of your heart ; it is natural for man 
to love authority and power. Some one has said, " each 
man has a Pope in his own bosom." But, sir, on the other 
hand, you would be as religiously bound to obey me as your 
Saviour, and would you like this as well % And will you 
presume to say that I have not as good a right to invent a 
church as John Wesley had, or as Coke and Asbury had % 
I most certainly have, as has any man in America ! 

The authority of Christ has been most wickedly profaned 
in this respect. Men, and gentle women, in her misguided 
zeal, have set the authority of Christ at bold defiance, and 
founded societies almost " ad infinitum" which they claim to 
be veritable and authoritative Churches of Christ. Some of 
them continue unto this day, and demand of us our homage 
and fellowship. I would as soon worship the great image 
that Nebuchadnezzar set up ! What honor and credit for 



REPUBLICANISM BA.CKWARDS. 47 

distinguished piety do the followers of these founders ascribe 
to the originators of new sects, though their hands may be 
clotted with Christian blood, or blackened with the ashes of 
the martyrs of Jesus Christ, which they have scattered upon 
the waters or cast to the winds for their unfaltering testi- 
mony against them. Luther and Calvin, and Henry VIII., pro- 
testant saints, and yet the murderers of saints / 

If to found a new sect is an evidence of superior piety, 
protestants cast the apostles far in the shade. We find no 
record in the New Testament, or in the history of the first 
ages, of Peterites or Paulites, nor even did Mary, the mo- 
ther of Jesus, found a church and call it by her name. They 
loved the Saviour too well to disobey his commands. But 
shortly after the death of the last apostle the wicked work 
of church-building began, Miss Quintilla leading the way. 
Nor was she the last woman who aspired to this honor. 
Miss Ann Lee, of Toad Lane, and Lady Huntingdon, organ- 
ized Churches (?) which are even now existing. Are their 
disciples the followers of Christ, or poor misguided women ? 
But, sir, who shall decide which of the past or recent human 
{ schemes" of church organization is most authoritative and 
deserving the most regard, that of Luther, Zwingle, or Cas- 
per Schwenkfield 1 — that of Henry VIII., Calvin, George Fox, 
or Count Zinzendorf? — that of John Wesley, John Irvin, or 
William Otterbein %— that of Bill Miller, Joe Smith, A.Camp- 
bell, or Jesse Furgerson ? Are they not, one and all, (though 
they were composed of pious Christians) human institutions, 
and An ti christian, because opposed to Christ's authority, and 
the rivals of his Church, as he organized it % Have I not as 
good authority to start a new and differently organized Church 
as had Calvin or John Wesley % And would it not be as 
'pious in me as in them to do so 1 The time is coming, and 
almost " now is," when this Church and sect-making business 



48 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

will be regarded as partaking of the boldest principle of 
Antichrist, and these protestant Church " schemes," as be- 
longing to Mystical Babylon, the daughter of the " Man of 
Sin." Understand me, sir, I am repudiating a principle and 
its products, not Christians. There may be multitudes of 
Christians in these human institutions, yet this fact does not 
make these societies Churches of Christ. There are Chris- 
tians in Babylon and it is Babylon still — a cage of every 
unclean bird and hateful thing. Every member of a Bible 
Society might be a Christian, and yet that would not makrj 
the society a Church. We will quote, though it is unneces- 
sary, additional authority to prove that the economy of the 
Christian Church is of heaven and not of man, for he who 
will not hear Christ will not hear the Prophets. Dan. ii. 
44. " In the days of these kings ;" kings of the fourth uni- 
versal empire, not of England — the Caesars — not the Geor- 
ges, " Shall the God of Heaven, (not Luther or Calvin, 
Wesley or Campbell,) set up a Kingdom which shall never 
be destroyed" — this kingdom must have been something 
visible and tangible — a distinct organization — otherwise it 
could not have been seen or assaulted, or been liable to des- 
truction — "but it shall break in pieces all these kingdoms 
and stand forever." Unless it had a visible organization, 
it could not oppose visible and literal organizations. If the 
kingdoms broken were visible, so is the " stone" or kingdom 
set up by the God of heaven. It was a kingdom that was 
set up, and there can be no kingdom without some sort of 
government and organization — it would be an anarchy. But 
the God of Heaven was to " set it up," not man, and there- 
fore not Calvin or Wesley. Do you say " he did it through 
man's instrumentality'?" I deny it. Proof. — " Thou sawest 
till that a stone was cut out without hands." Dan. ii. 34. 
" Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the 



KEPUBLICAN1SM BACKWARDS. 49 

mountain without hands.' 11 Dan. ii. 43. I understand that this 
"stone" was not the work of man's device ; God was its author. 
Do you grant it, and yet claim that he inspired men to do it? 
If so it will not relieve your society of its human origin, for 
you would be compelled to go back to the days of inspired 
men, and this was seventeen centuries before Wesley's day. 

Eut the "stone" was to roll upon the image, not in fifty 
disruptured fragments, one piece upon the image and the 
rest against each other, doing more harm to each other than 
to the " image," as Christendom is now doing, if you call all 
existing religious societies true churches. I wish to call 
your special attention to one difficulty which it becomes you 
to review. This " stone" was to smite the feet of the image 
and break them in pieces, and afterwards to destroy the 
whole image. How is the Church to break in pieces the 
monarchisms of earth? Not with the sword, literal or 
physical force, for her weapons are not carnal. How then 
can those iron monarchies be overthrown by moral force ? 
Let us notice that the feet and legs of this image are com- 
posed of iron mixed with mirey clay, two substances God 
never made to unite. Of what two elements are the despot- 
isms of the Italian and European States composed ? Church 
and State — answering to the clay and iron, elements God 
never intended to unite. What is the cement that now 
unites them? Answer: Infant sprinkling. The influence 
of the Church of Christ is to dissolve this cement, and then 
the iron and clay will part and crumble. When the feet 
and legs are broken, the image must fall easily — so when the 
ten monarchies of Europe shall have fallen and given place 
to democracy or republics, absoluteism in the whole world 
will soon cease. 

Now, sir, if Episcopal Methodism, (or any Pedobaptist 
society,) is the Church, it can never do this work. Can it 
3 



50 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

make war upon infant baptism, and practice the rite itself 1 
Can it by the influence of its example and teaching destroy 
despotism when it is a huge clerical despotism itself? As 
well might you set Satan to cast out Satan ! ! Are the 
various Pedobaptist societies, together, this Church — this 
" stone ?" How can they all increase and fill the whole 
earth 1 Methodism could not fill Tennessee without swal- 
lowing up all other churches, and so of others, only one of 
all the existing societies can possibly be this stone, and no 
Pedobaptist society alone, or the aggregate of them all, can 
constitute this stone, for they cannot perform the work it" 
does, possessing as they do the very elements of the image ! 
It was the mission of Christ to " cut out " this stone — to set 
up this kingdom — to make the new covenant — to ratify it, 
and upon it to establish his Church so firmly, that the gates 
of hell could not destroy it. The Christian Church he did 
organize, taught its doctrines — appointed its ordinances and 
determined its polity or discipline, and left the solemn warn- 
ing to his disciples to teach, in all time to come, the observ- 
ance only of what he had himself taught them. 

I do not claim that all the principles of church organiza- 
tion and discipline are taught in any one chapter, but like all 
the doctrines of faith, scattered promiscuously through the 
whole Testament. We must gather and embody them as 
we do other doctrines. 

That I am not singular in this view, I quote your own late 
brother and bishop, Bascom. " The New Testament fur- 
nishes the principles, but not the form of church govern- 
ment : and in the adaptation of forms to these principles, 
Christian bodies should be governed mainly by the facts and 
precedents furnished in the apostolic writings. The will and 
mind of the Great Head of the Church, on this subject, so far 
as clearly revealed, whether by express statute or fair impli- 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 51 

cation, cannot be contravened without impiety.''''* This I fully 
endorse, since the principles of government always and ever 
must determine the form. To prove this I only need to quote 
another sentiment from Mr. Bascom. "The assumption, 
that absolute power in the affairs of church government is a 
sacred deposit in the hands of the ministry, [as the Method- 
ist clergy teach and preach,] libels the genius and chari- 
ties of the New Testament ! " j- 

I quote the authority of a learned Episcopalian. " There 
is no part of the ecclesiastical system which is not faintly 
traced in the Scriptures, and no part which is much more 
than faintly traced ! " J This, though a faint admission, is 
powerful and conclusive, considering it is from an Episco- 
palian Pedobaptist. We might quote columns, but we close 
with Milton. 

" Church government is prescribed in the gospel, and to say 
otherwise is unsound." § 

"As therefore it is unsound to say that God hath not ap- 
pointed any set [i. e. definite or particular] government in 
his Church, so it is untrue" \\ 

" Thus, through all periods and changes of the Church, it 
hath been proved that God hath still reserved to himself the 
right of enacting church government." % 

Now, I ask, how can it be accounted for, that the different 
sects of Pedobaptists from Rome down, contend that church 
government, discipline, rites and ceremonies, are not defi- 



* Declaration of Rights, Art. 9. 

t Declaration of Rights, Art. 10, quoted by A. Stephens, in his 
Church Polity, published by the Methodist Book Concern, N. Y. 
X Tract No. 8, or Oxford series. 
§ Milton's Complete Works, London edition, page 29. 
|| Reasons of Church Government, chapter 11, page 3L 
If Reasons of Church Government, page 32, 



52 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. 

nitely determined in the Testament, while Baptists invari- 
ably contend that they are, unless it is that Pedobaptists are 
conscious their systems and practice are not countenanced 
by Christ and his Apostles, while Baptists are fully conscious, 
and boldly confident^ that their church polity and practices are 
fully warranted? Can you answer it otherwise with any 
show of reason ? 

We here conclude the difference between Methodism and 
the Church of Christ. The latter " is from above," is of 
divine origin — cut out without human hands — built by Christ, 
commenced in the days of the Csesars — has continued un- 
changed — and will stand forever — the Gilead of its district 
and the Pharos of the world : while Methodism is justly 
represented under the form of a two horned beast, (see Rev. 
xiii.,) because it is a despotism — possessing temporal and 
spiritual power with horns like a lamb, the emblem of inno- 
cence, because this power is exercised by the clergy who 
ought to be Lamb-like — as coming up out of the earth," be- 
cause it was originated by man, (and an unregencrated man 
at that) — had its first commencement in the days of George 
the III., and is an Iron Wheel of clerical despotism, libelling 
the genius and charities of Christianity, (if Bascom be right, ) 
as it crushes and obliterates the dearest rights of God's 
creatures and Christ's freemen. Think of this chapter, 
read3r, think of it well. 



LETTER V. 



Christ forbade his disciples to teach the observance of any 
thing he had not taught them — Admission of Dr. Bangs — 
Methodism a human invention ; proved by Bishop SouWs 
own ivords, by Wesley and Methodist writers generally — is 
the grand-daughter of Rome — the grand-child of the " Man 
of Sin" and Son of perdition ! ! the Churches of Christ 
cannot fellowship it, or receive any of its acts. 

Dear Sir : — In my last, one point at least was most con- 
clusively and unanswerably settled, that Christ gave to the 
kingdom he set up, the Church he built, a definite form of 
organization — its government or discipline, and that if he 
did not, it would have been a palpable violation of his last 
charge to them, for the apostles to have invented Churches 
or any visible society, or enforced the observance of any 
regulations, laws or discipline. The law of Christ was speci- 
fic. " Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever / 
have commanded you." This most positively forbade them 
to teach or enjoin upon Churches they might gather, the ob- 
servance of any thing Christ had not taught or commanded 
them, the Apostles, to teach, previous to his giving the com- 
mission. If reason, revelation, or the principles of civil law 
can determine any thing, this point is determined. To over- 
turn this, is to overturn the principles of all language. If it 

(53) 



54 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

is urged that the Holy Spirit taught the Apostles what in- 
structions to give the Churches, I reply, he was " only to 
guide them into all truth, for he shall not speak of himself^ 
but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak." The 
Spirit was not to be an independent teacher, he was to speak 
nothing of himself, but was to guide them into all truth. 
How ? (See John iv. 26.) But the Comforter, which is the 
Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he 
shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your re- 
membrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.'''' He enabled 
the Apostles to recall to mind all the teachings of Christ. 
We might add, that no one but the head of the Church has 
a right to direct or govern it. The Pope claims to be the 
head of the Catholic Church — the ruling monarch of England 
the head of the Episcopal — the General Conference of the 
Methodist E. Church, and consequently they have a right to 
govern them as they please ; but Christ is head over all 
things to his Church, and. none but Christ has a right to 
govern his Church by arbitrary dictation — it would be daring 
impiety for them to do it ; they may govern their human 
" schemes" if they will, but let them not presume to meddle 
with the Church of Christ. Again, no one but the legitimate 
lawgiver of a kingdom has authority to make laws for that 
kingdom. Christ is the only lawgiver in Zion, and no one 
but himself has a right to make laws for his churches. It 
would be high treason against the government of Jesus 
Christ, for any one person or body of men, to arrogate to 
themselves the authority to make and change laws in the 
kingdom of Christ — it is the boldest act, and characteristic 
of Antichrist, to do this. I conclude this subject with an 
admission of Dr. N. Bangs,* who says, "It is allowed Christ 

* Original Church of Christ, page 87. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 55 

and his Apostles did put the Churches under some form of 
government or other." If they did, I ask you, I ask every 
candid man, did they not put all the Churches under the 
same form of government, and the same laws 1 No sane 
man will deny it. They did not organize one a monarchy, 
another a despotism, another an executive democracy, and 
another a clerical aristocracy. If not, then only one of all 
the existing sects can be considered as the Church of Christ. 
That the Methodist E. Church is of purely human origin, 
and very recent date, I now wish to show from yourself, in 
connection with your brother Bishops, from John "Wesley, 
and Methodist historians generally. Indeed, no one claims 
that it is anything but a human device and invention, but some 
of your writers make the originators almost inspired men, as 
we shall see raised up of God and sent to devise it ! ! 

Joshua Soule, and three other Bishops, " We think it ex- 
pedient to give you a brief account of the rise of Methodism, 
both in Europe and America. In 1729, two young men, in 
England, reading the Bible, saw that they could not be saved 
without holiness, followed after it and incited others to do 
so. In 1737, they saw, likewise, that men are justified be- 
fore they are sanctified ; but still holiness was their object. 
God then thrust them out to raise up a holy people / / 

" We esteem it our duty and privilege most earnestly to 
recommend you, as members of our Church, our form of 
Discipline which has been founded on the experience of a 
long series of years ; as also on the observation and remarks 
we have made on ancient and modern Churches."* 

Methodist Discipline. — "In consequence of this our 
venerable friend, who, under God, had been the father of 
the great revival of religion now extending over the 

* Methodist Discipline, page 3. 



56 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

earth, by means of the Methodists, determined to ordain 
ministers for America, and for this purpose, in the year 
1784, sent over three regularly ordained clergy, but pre- 
ferring the Episcopal mode of government to any other, he 
set apart," &c.* 

From these three extracts we learn : 

(1.) That Methodism was organized by two young men, 
(unconverted too,) in the year 1729. 

In the second extract, the Bishops do not claim that 
Methodism is founded on the Scriptures, but simply on hu- 
man wisdom, and observation, on the experience of a long 
series of years, as also on the observation and remarks they 
themselves have made on ancient and modern Churches !" 
A singular and sandy foundation. 

In the last we have the admission that Wesley was the 
father of Methodism, that the Methodist Societies were or- 
ganized into a Church, and so called first, A. D. 1784, just 
68 years ago, and while Methodist Societies in England 
have never yet been organized into a Church or so called ! 
We also learn an important fact, that the only reason the 
Methodist E. Church is Episcopal, rather than Eepublican, 
is, not because the word of God was consulted or cared for 
in the matter, but simply because it is claimed — not proven 
— that Mr. Wesley "preferred" it ! ! 

I might quote extensively from Wesley's Works, to prove 
that he was the father of Methodism, did not all Methodists 
admit the fact and boast of it % 

Isaac Taylor, in his work, " Wesley and Methodism," 
page 199, says, " Wesley anism is a scheme — it is the pro- 
duct of uninspired intelligence, and therefore has its de- 
fects." 

* Methodist Discipline, page 7. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 57 

Page 214. " But Wesley auism is the work of man, * * 
it is open to the freest scrutiny. 

" Dr. Coke arrived in New York on the 3d of Nov. 1784, 
and on the 25th of December following, the General Con- 
ference assembled at Baltimore, at which time the Methodist 
E. Church was organized." — Dr. Bangs' Original Church, 
page 26. 

" Methodism has, from the beginning, been, in a most 
striking manner, the child of Providence. Nearly all its 
peculiar characteristics were adopted, without any previous 
design, on the part of the instruments by whose agency it 
was brought into organized existence, as circumstances 
seemed to require, and without expectation of their becoming 
elements in a permanent ecclesiastical constitution." — Dr. 
Hinkle, in Platform of Methodism. 

This only claims that the Methodist E. Church came into 
existence by sheer accident. 

The Christian Church was organized by Jesus Christ — 
Methodism by accident — mere happen-so. 

Methodism, by J. H. Inskip, a work widely endorsed by 
the Methodist press. " As a creature of Providence, Method- 
ism, in her peculiar external organization, has adapted her- 
self to the exigences of the times, * * and hence though 
constantly changing, yet, like the modifications through which 
the human system passes, in the various stages of its de- 
velopment, she has always maintained her identity entire." 
— Introduction. 

" It is but a little more than 100 years since the first 
Methodist society was formed by Mr. Wesley in Eng- 
land. The M. E. Church has not been in existence 10 years." 
—Page 53. 

"Finally, it may be said, Methodism in England and 
America was a special system. It originated in as dark 
3* J 



58 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

and unpropitious a period almost as ever known in the his- 
tory of Protestant Christianity. 

" To meet the emergency, which then existed, God raised 
up a company of great men — men who were great in intel- 
lectual endowment, moral excellence, and inventive genius. 
There was John Wesley, who has justly been designated the 
greatest of ecclesiastical legislators — Whitefield, the most ex- 
traordinary of pulpit orators — Charles Wesley, among the 
"best of sacred poets — Coke, the leader of modern mission- 
aries — Asbury, the most laborious of Bishops— «and Clark 
and Benson, one of the most learned, the other the best prac- 
tical commentator ever known. These men devised this 
powerful instrumentality, well styled, " Christianity in 
earnest, i. e. Methodism. 

Here the fact is distinctly asserted, that John Wesley, the 
Moses, and Charles Wesley, Coke, and Asbury, the Aarons of 
Methodist Israel, did devise the system of Methodism. It is 
then of men, and " came up out of the earths It is even by 
the best of Methodists acknowledged as an imperfect and 
defective system. 

Says Inskip, " a more wise or better arranged system of 
religious and moral enterprise, could not have been con- 
ceived. Of course, like all other human institutions it has 

ITS DEFECTS AND IMPERFECTIONS. — -Page 65. 

We might proceed with our proofs, but let these suffice. 
Such is Methodism as it is presented to us by its warm 
friends and admirers — an imperfect, defective, human insti- 
tution, only a little over 100 years old — and not one of its 
apostles, ministers, or members presumed to call it a Church 
until 70 years ago ! Who then calls upon me to fall down 
and worship this great worldly image that Wesley set up, 
and acknowledge and regard and fellowship it as the Church 
of Christ, the ground and pillar of the truth % Who will pre- 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 59 

sume to call upon Christians to forsake the Church " set up n 
and "built" by Jesus Christ, a perfect pattern of which we 
find in his word, to support, instead, an " imperfect" " de- 
fective" rickety " scheme," invented by one John Wesley, 
priest in one of the branches of the apostate Churches of 
Eome ? Had the Church of Christ been destroyed, and the 
model lost, that God was compelled to raise up Wesley to 
originate a new scheme f or had the Church of Christ proved 
inefficient and a failure, that it was necessary for the wisdom 
and " inventive genius " of Wesley to be called upon to save 
the world by devising a new and unheard of scheme of 
church government'? Would not each position be blas- 
phemous 1 And do not Methodist writers virtually plead 
this, when seeking an apology for the appearance of Method- 
ism, and thus exalt Wesley's system over Christ's system 
of church organization % They do, " in many respects the best 
most efficient form of church government known in the world. 
A more wise or better arranged system of religious and moral 
enterprise, could not have been conceived." — Inskip. " The 
design of Providence in raising up the preachers called 
Methodists, their missions was not to form any new sect [but 
they did ! !] ; but to reform the continent, particularly the 
Church — and to spread scriptural holiness over these lands." 
— Inskip. 

Here it is boldly asserted that Providence raised up Me- 
thodists to reform the Church — the Church of Christ, of 
course — it having become corrupt and a failure — and how 
reform it but to remodel it after the counsel of their own 
inventive genius? If Wesley did this, did he not assume 
and use powers and authority the apostle attributes to Anti- 
christ — thinking to change times, laws, and ordinances 1 
That the defects of the apostolic Church organization, and its 
failure to accomplish the end purposed by it, it boldly pleads 



60 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL? 

as an apology for Methodism. Hear Isaac Taylor : u No 
man was more devoutly observant of the authority of holy 
Scripture than Wesley ; but his understanding was as prac- 
tical in its tendencies as his piety was sincere. He 'perfectly 
felt, whether or not he denned that conviction in words, that 
an apostolic Church — although right to a pin — which did not 
subserve its main purpose — the spread of the gospel and the con- 
version of the ungodly must be regarded as an absurdity, and 
a hindrance to truth. What is the chaff to the wheat ? — 
" What are wholesome and scriptural usages and orders, 
which leave Christianity to die away within an inclosure ?" 

Again : 

"It [Methodism] originated in as dark and unpropitious 
a period, almost, as ever known in the history of Protestant 
Christianity. Immorality, heresy, and spiritual death had | 
gained a spiritual ascendancy when it was instituted. To 
meet the emergency which then existed, God raised up a 
company of great men, &e. ; these men devised this powerful 
instrumentality" i. e. Methodism. — Inskip, pp. 54, 55. 

What is more clearly taught here than that the Christian 
Church had become effete and powerless for good — that the 
gates of hell had prevailed over it — that it was illy devised 
and unfit to meet the wants of the world, and having 
signally failed, when all was lost, and there was no eye 
to pity or arm to bring salvation, help was laid upon one 
John Wesley, priest of one of the daughters of the scarlet 
woman ! ! Beautiful system — Satan casting out Satan. 
Rome persecuting and opposing herself! ! 

I say here the fact is clearly intimated, that Wesley regarded 
the apostolic Church organization as inefficient and useless, and 
consequently rejected it as "an absurdity, and a hindrance to 
the truth leaving Christianity to die away. What an epitaph 
for frail man to write upon the work of Christ and his Apos- 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 61 

ties ! ! He then mapped out of his own brain a religious 
scheme — Church system — to supersede it to accomplish 
what that could not — thus assuming more than Christly prero- 
gatives, since he rejected the authority and work of Christ, 
and set up a human organization to be the rival and antago- 
nist of Christ's Church ! Methodism, then, seems to have 
been originated a rival of, and designed to supplant the apos- 
tolic pattern of Church organization, and its workings from 
its birth until the present, are all directly and palpably to 
this end ! How then can a follower of Christ encourage it, 
or enlist under its rival banners %. Are not such the follow- 
ers of men ? Even Methodists so regard themselves — the 
followers of John Wesley ! Methodist Societies are called 
by Methodist writers, very properly, " Mr. Wesley's Socie- 
ties," and " Methodist Societies," not Churches of Christ. 

He would not have turned any of the nobility away if 
they had sought admission into his classes." — Inskip. 

" The fact, that few of the higher classes joined Mr. Wes- 
ley's societies" §c. — Inskip. 

"The policy of John Wesley, and his fellow-laborers and 
sons in the gospel." — Inskip. 

" You are the elder brother of the American Methodists ; 
I am, under God, the father cf the whole family." — John Wes. 
ley, in letter to Asbury. 

Here Wesley claims a divine right to create and rule 
Methodists, under God ; i. e., jure divino. 

" Our design is to show, that it is our duty as ministers 
of Christ, and the successors of the apostles and of John 
Wesley," &c. — Inskip. 

Methodist ministers the successors of the apostles and 
John Wesley ! ! 

" The first regular conference was held in Philadelphia, 
June, 1773. From the record of their proceedings, it ap- 



62 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

pears there were* in connection at that time ten ministers and 
1600 members. At this conference the authority of Mr. 
Wesley, and the doctrine and discipline of the Methodists, 
were formally recognized and adopted."—- Unship. 

And this recognition has never been revoked ! What is 
this but a human society, and what were these preachers 
but the servants and followers of a man, when they formally 
acknowledged Wesley's authority, and pledged themselves 
to obey his book of laws, (the Discipline,) in both faith 
and practice ? A Christian Church acknowledges the autho 
rity of Christ alone, and the doctrine and discipline of the 
New Testament. 

Hence Methodists are very properly denominated, by 
their writers, "the followers of Mr. Wesley" "And such has 
been the course almost uniformly pursued by the followers 
of Wesley." — Inskip, p. 39. Et cum mul. al. 

" The whole body of Methodists knowing this, and ac- 
knowledging Mr. Wesley as their spiritual fa ther and founder, 
would receive from him what they could not with any jus- 
tice or propriety from any one else." — Dr. Bang^s Orig. 
Ch. p. 99. 

"As Mr. Wesley, under God, was the founder of the 
Methodist Societies, and the expounder of Methodist theo- 
logy, so was he the originator of much that is peculiar to 
the ecclesiastical polity of all the different branches of the 
great Methodist body in all parts of the world." — Gorre's 
His. Meth., p. 217, the latest Methodist historian. 

Notice, Mr. Wesley, it is claimed, instituted two forms 
of church government, one in England and one in 
America. 

But the crowning presumption of Methodists is, after hav- 
ing freely admitted that Charles and John Wesley originated 
and devised the whole Methodist scheme, they impiously 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 63 

claim that they did it by inspiration, or at least by divine 
right and authority. 

Wesley himself has set his people an example, "God then 
thrust them out to raise a holy people." — Wesley. See Dis- 
cipline, p. 3. 

" We believe that God's design in raising up the preachers 
called Methodists." — The four Bishops. See Discipline, p. 5. 

" Methodism," says Inskip, " is a creature of Providence." 
What does he mean by Providence — chance? If, not he 
means of divine origin. 

" They were guided by the admonitions of Providence." — 
Inskip, page 52. Were these admonitions of the sjiiritl 
Then it was inspiration! Mr. Inskip explains this providence 
of God on another page, as under the immediate direction 
of the Spirit. Then the Methodist Discipline is as much in- 
spired as the New Testament, and the acts of Methodist 
preachers as the acts of the apostles ! 

But it is insisted upon that the Wesleys and their apos- 
tles were in some way inspired, and acted under divine war- 
rant. "To meet the emergency which then existed, God 
raised up a company of men," &c. — Inskip, p. 54. 

" When it pleased God to raise up Wesley, only about 
two or three incidental forms of aggressive action were to 
be found in the Protestant Churches. He was providentially 
[i. e., under the immediate direction of the Spirit, is the 
impression made by Methodist writers] led to introduce an 
arrangement," &c. — Inskip, p. 169. 

I have, in the last five letters, candidly, and as inoffen 
sively as possible, laid before you my reasons for refusing 
to regard and fellowship your " religious scheme " as the 
Church of Christ. I have shown that his Church was organ- 
ized in his day, and has stood unchanged and indestructible 
until the present, and will continue the same, unreformed, 



64 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

until the end of time ; while the Church of which you are a 
partial head, came into being only 68 years ago, and no or- 
ganization like it ever existed before ! I have shown what 
every Christian believes, that the Church of Christ is of 
divine origin ; Christ its author, its head, and its law-giver ; 
while I have proved, from your own words, as well as those 
of Wesley and your writers, no one denying, but all boasting, 
that John Wesley was your spiritual father and founder, and 
your Methodism a human scheme of man's device and inven- 
tion — a man-made institution — as much so as that of Odd 
Fellowship or Masonry — an imperfect and defective organ 
ization. How can a Christian man dare to fellowship it as a 
scriptural body, much less prefer it to the Church as organ- 
ized by our blessed Saviour 1 It is a rival of Christ's fold, | 
and those who enter it leave Christ to follow men — become 
the followers of Wesley and the servants of the General Con- 
ference. Methodism is a sect, not of the Apostolic Church, 
but of the Roman Apostacy ; having the Church of Eng- 
land for its mother, and the woman in scarlet for its grand- 
mother. 

If it is necessary for a Church to have valid ordinances and 
ordinations, in what light must we regard the baptisms and 
ordinations of Methodist ministers ? They have one and all 
received their ordinations and authority from Rome — mysti- 
cal Babylon, the " Man of Sin " and son of perdition, through 
the Church of England ! ! Methodism, from its own testi- 
mony, belongs to the family of mystical Babylon, a grand- 
daughter, and can the Churches of Christ, with any degree 
of right and propriety, recognize, by receiving, the acts of 
mystical Babylon as Christian or scriptural. Baptists have 
refused to receive her baptisms for 1400 years, and have suf- 
fered cruel martyrdoms on account of it, and shall we, their 
descendants, basely betrav those blood-sealed and life- 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 65 

attested principles for fear, not of prisons and death, but 
the impious scoffs and derision of those who oppose them ? 
Shall we now, without either a stake or a prison in view, re- 
pudiate the principles and practices of our martyred ancestors, 
by recognizing the man-called, (for it is evident that God 
never called any man to preach Methodism,) man-made 
preachers of your human societies, by inviting them into our 
pulpits, and thus virtually saying to the world, " These are 
Christ's ministers, hear ye them, when they are only Mr. 
Wesley's preachers V You cannot expect the reflecting and 
consistent of my brethren to act thus. 

In my next, I will show how Methodist societies w r ere 
made churches, and that Methodist Episcopacy was surrepti- 
tiously introduced, and, understood in a prelatical sense, or as 
equal to the episcopacy of the Church of England, is both 
spurious and invalid, and if not, its assumptions are indeed 
ridiculous and contemptible. 



LETTER VI 



Methodism an accident — The first chapter of the Discipline 
reviewed — Its statements at variance with facts — Methodists 
who-irust to it are deceived — Mr. Wesley was opposed to 
Episcopacy — Did not believe in three orders. 

Dear Sir : — Having proved in niy last, by Methodist 
writers, that your system of Methodism is purely of human 
invention ; I might also have added, an accidental institution. 
We quote from " Church Polity," by Rev. A. Stevens, pub- 
lished by your Book-Concern : 

u The Methodist economy was not a contrived system. It 
was the result of providential circumstances." — p. 83. 

" The arrangements and regulations thus accidentally, or ' 
rather providentially, provided, gradually grew permanent, 
and formed the government of the sect." 

" Thus societies, classes, chapels, lay preachers, itinerants, •» 
conferences, minutes, or the discipline, successively and pro- 
videntially [i. e., accidentally] entered into the system of 
Methodism. At the head of this system stood Wesley, 
gladly acknowledged by the increasing thousands of his fol- 
lowers as the founder and rightful director of the whole." 
—p. 85. 

Dr. Stevens frankly owns that Methodism came into 
being in parts, and by accident — and that it all belonged to 

(66) 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 67 

Wesley, who was the rightful director and dictator of it 
according to his own sovereign pleasure. 

How can you ask Christians to recognize, regard, and fel- 
lowship it as a Church of Christ, when it was neither organ- 
ized nor set up by Christ % 

Since writing my last, I have seen the last number of the 
North British Review, containing a review of Mr. Taylor's 
late and last work, entitled " Wesley and Methodism." Mr. 
Taylor's work is spoken of in terms of the highest commend- 
ation. The reviewer, on every point, most fully asserts and 
corroborates the position I have taken with regard to the 
worldly character of the Methodist organization — and it is 
of itself sufficient to show the light in which it is viewed by 
historians, reviewers, and indeed by every reflecting mind. 

" The plans and arrangements of Wesley were, in their 
general character, quite warrantable and competent, and as 
he did not profess to proclaim or impose them as a part of 
the scripturally determined constitution of the Church, they 
ought to be judged of as human expedients, just by their fit- 
ness to promote, temporarily or permanently, the interests 
of true religion." 

" Human wisdom is incompetent to devise permanent 
arrangements adapted to all times and circumstances. Divine 
wisdom alone is adequate to, and we enjoy the guidance of 
divine wisdom in this matter, only, in so far as the constitu- 
tion and arrangements of the Church or Christian Society 
have been determined in Scripture, and in so far as we have 
rightly understood and applied the indications given us in 
these, of the way in which the Christian religion is to be pro- 
moted." 

" Wesley did not profess to be organizing a Church upon a 
scriptural basis. His Institute [Methodism] was the product 
of his own wisdom and sagacity, and must be subject to the 



68 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 



fluctuations and instability of all merely human things-" — 
North British Review. 

" It is certain that Wesley originally did not wish or in- 
tend his Institute to be a distinct Church, but merely a sup- 
plement or appendage to the Church of England. * * * 
The people who joined him he wished to remain still mem- 
bers of the established Church, to attend upon her worship, 
and to receive sealing ordinances in her communion. He 
did not intend to form a distinct or separate Church, and in 
point of fact did not do so." — Taylor. 

" Wesley does not appear to have ever investigated the 
question, What is the scriptural organization of the Church? 
with the view and for the purpose of bringing the conclu- 
sions he might be led to form upon this subject, to bear upon 
the regulations of his Institute."' — Taylor. 

" In treating of Wesleyan Methodism, ' as a hierarchy or 
scheme of spiritual government,' Mr. Taylor brings out some 
very important views in regard to the fundamental principle 
of organization, which vests the whole real control of the 
society in the ministers, and excludes the Church and people 
from any recognized or effective influence in the management! 
of its affairs. We quite agree with him in thinking that such 
a constituted arrangement is utterly indefensible in theory, 
and that though somewhat modified in practice, it must oper 
ate injuriously upon the permanent influence of the body." — 
North British Review. 

In addition to the above testimony, my eye has just fallen 
upon the following from the pen of the editor of one of youri 
Conference papers, the Memphis Methodist Advocate. 

" The archetype of Methodism is the character of its founds 
er. He [Wesley] was a man of but one aim, and to this 
every thought and effort converged." 

" How blessed is Methodism, to have originated (humanly i 



i 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 69 

. speaking) from such an author. She never need to fear for 
her safety or prosperity, while she wears the mantle of such 
a prophet." I would say, How wore blessed to have origi- 
nated with Jesus Christ, and how much less to fear did she 
f wear the mantle of such a prophet ! ! 

In view of the mass of authority I have produced, showing 
that Methodism is of man — a worldly scheme — a human 
expedient — a man-devised society — am I not warranted in 
saying, without laying myself open to the charge of illiberal- 
ity or bigotry, that for the organization of Methodism as a 
scriptural Church I have no more Christian fellowship or 
regard than for that of Masonry or Odd Fellowship % Am 
I not sustained in calling upon you to withdraw your claims 
to be considered and called a Church of Christ, and take upon 
you the name your founder gave you, and wished you to be 
called — a Society — religious, if you please — a " Religious 
Society ?" Would not this act do much to soften the pre- 
judices and opposition which your arrogant and unscriptural 
Church pretensions have awakened in the minds of consider- 
ate Christians ? 

I now leave the fortuitous origin of Methodism, and 
devote this letter to the examination of the fictitious charac- 
ter of the first chapter of your Discipline, which you and 
your fellow- bishops have endorsed and sent out to the world. 

It is admitted by all that the published histories and docu- 
ments of a community are open to examination, and subject 
to the freest criticism. Between the first chapter of your 
Discipline and the facts furnished in your published histo- 
ries, and the writings of Mr. Wesley, I can but decide there 
is a very great discrepancy — one, if continued longer with- 
out a satisfactory explanation, must be looked upon as a 
culpable and designed misrepresentation to mislead the peo- 
ple. I give the chapter at length. 



70 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. 

" The preachers and members of our society in general, 
being convinced that there was a great deficiency of vital 
religion in the Church of England in America, and being in 
many places destitute of the Christian sacraments, as seve- 
ral of the clergy had forsaken their churches, requested the 
late Rev. John Wesley to take such measures, in his wisdom 
and prudence, as would afford them suitable relief in their 
distress. 

" In consequence of this, our venerable friend, who, under 
God, had been the father of the great revival of religion now 
extending over the earth, by the means of the Methodists, 
determined to ordain ministers for America ; and for this 
purpose, in the year 1784, sent over three regularly ordained 
clergy ; but preferring the Episcopal mode of Church Gov- 
ernment to any other, (1) he solemnly set apart, by the 
imposition of his hands and prayer, one of them, viz., Tho- 
mas Coke, Doctor of Civil Law, late of Jesus College, in the 
University of Oxford, and a Presbyter of the Church of 
England, for the Episcopal office ; (2) and having delivered 
to him letters of Episcopal orders, (3) commissioned and 
directed him to set apart Francis Asbury, then general as- 
sistant of the Methodist Society in America, for the same 
Episcopal office ; (4) he, the said Francis Asbury, being first 
ordained deacon and elder. In consequence of which the 
said Francis Asbury was solemnly set apart for the said 
Episcopal office (5) by prayer, and the imposition of the 
hands of the said Thomas Coke, other regularly ordained 
ministers assisting in the sacred ceremony. At which time 
the General Conference, held at Baltimore, did unanimously 
receive the said Thomas Coke and Francis Asbury, as (heir 
Bishops, being fully satisfied of the validity of their Episco- 
pal ordination." (6) Dis. ch. 1. 

Now, as the present Episcopal form of government of the 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 71 

Methodist E. Church is not made to rest upon the word of 
God — nor even expediency — but the alleged authority and 
appointment of John Wesley, its venerable "father and 
founder," I would suppose it would be considered a matter 
of the first importance to Methodists to know whether, in- 
deed and in truth, Mr. Wesley did "prefer the Episcopal 
form of government," and ordain Dr. Coke an Episcopal 
Bishop — a minister of the third order, and if he did com- 
mission and direct Coke to ordain Mr. Asbury for the same 
office — if the General Conference did unanimously receive 
Coke and Asbury as their bishops — and also, if Messrs. Coke 
and Asbury were fully satisfied with their Episcopal 

ORDINATIONS. 

It may be asked by some of your brethren, What does it 
matter whether these things were so or not, and why should 
it concern me to enquire ? I answer, Episcopal Methodism 
is one of the existing sects which stands claimant to the 
title and regard of a Church of Christ. It calls upon me, 
and the denomination of which I am a member, to fellow- 
ship it — to receive it as a gospel Church at the Lord's Sup- 
per, and its ministers into our pulpits as our religious teach- 
ers — and it calls upon my relatives and friends, and the 
world, for whose well and right doing it is my pleasure and 
my duty to watch and labor, to enter its societies, and obey 
its rules, and support its laws and practices ; and I cannot 
grant its requests, nor can Baptists accede to its arrogant 
demands, nor can I advise my friends or the world to enter 
its folds. But does the matter stop here? No. I am held 
up before the world, as are my brethren and Church, for pub- 
lic reproach — made a hissing and a scorn by its thousands 
of circuit riders — the travelling police of Methodism — before 
their congregations in every city, village and hamlet, from 
one end of the land to the other. Baptists are pronounced 



72 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

sectarian bigots, illiberal and uncharitable ; and all the bit- 
terest and most violent prejudices of the world arrayed 
against us, because we cannot conscientiously so regard and 
fellowship "Mr. Wesley's scheme" and its ministers. Is it 
not, then, proper and right that I should give my reason, 
and the reasons which I understand govern my brethren in 
their course % 

But more than this — It becomes me, and every other 
faithful friend and servant of Jesus Christ, to aid in bringing 
about the answer to his prayer, that his followers might all 
be one — that the world might believe on his name. Many, 
very many, who in their hearts are his warm and ardent 
friends, I most charitably believe, are this day found in the 
fold Mr. Wesley set up a few years ago, and they are en- 
listed under his banner, advocating with a blind and mis- 
guided zeal, the Episcopal form of government, honestly be- 
lieving, because they see it so stated in the Discipline, that 
Mr. Wesley considered it scriptural, and therefore organized 
his Churches accordingly. If this is all false, I shall unde- 
ceive these Christians, and save them from the advocacy of 
a known, palpable, and unscriptural error before the world 
— and have thrown down one of the barriers that divide 
professing Christians. Will not this be something, and 
ought not my honest, though humble efforts, to correct the 
errors of Methodists, command and secure their warmest 
attachment? I have been attempting to correct the errors 
they advocate for several years past, and while I have se- 
cured the friendship and warmest Christian regards of hun- 
dreds, yet the masses, through the influence of their press 
and spiritual rulers, have been taught to look upon me as 
their enemy. Why should it be so ? Do they hate the 
truth ? That I have told them the truth, I appeal to your- 
self. I lay all my positions before you — I ask you not to 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 73 

reply, unless to correct me. If I am correct, your silence 
will be sufficient, and it will be understood by all, since that 
"silence gives consent" is an universal proverb and principle. 

1. Mr. Wesley did not consider the Episcopal Form 
of Government Scriptural, if he did prefer it. 

We understand by Episcopacy, three separate and distinct 
orders in the ministry, and that of bishops as the third or- 
der, possessing a divine right to overrule all. Now, Mr. 
Wesley did not believe that the Scriptures warranted three 
orders of ministers, but believed as Baptists and Presby- 
terians, that bishops, elders, or presbyters, were of the same 
order. In his Works, vol. vii. p. 311, he says, ' : Lord King's 
account of the Primitive Church convinced me, many years 
ago, that bishops and presbyters are the same order, and 
consequently have the same right to ordain." 

This is a full and frank confession, and if his convictions 
are correct, the claims of a Methodist or Episcopal bishop 
are unscriptural and most arrogant/ Did Mr. Wesley 
ordain an Episcopal bishop, with this conviction % 

See also his Notes on the Gospel, written at the close of 
his life : 

Acts i. 20. And his " bishopric" he renders apostleship. 

In Phillippians i. 1. In his notes on bishops, he says, 
" The word bishops here includes all the presbyters at Phil- 
lippi, as well as the ruling presbyters ; the names bishop and 
presbyter, or elder, being promiscuously used in the first 
ages ! ! 

Did Mr. Wesley, in the face of this, solemnly ordain Mr. 
Coke an Episcopal bishop, an order of ministry he believed 
neither found in, nor warranted by, God's word ? 

" But that it (Episcopacy) is prescribed in scripture, I do 
not believe. This opinion, which I once zealously espoused, 
I have been ashamed of ever since I read Bishop Stilling- 
4 



74 . THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

fleet's ' Irenicon.' I think he has unanswerably proved that 
'neither Christ nor his apostles prescribe any particular 
form of Church government ; and that the plea of divine 
right for diocesan Episcopacy was never heard of in the 
primitive Church.'' " — Wesley's Works, vol. 7. 

Who would suppose, then, while Wesley was in his 
senses, that he would lay his hands on Dr. Coke, and in the 
name of the Holy Trinity make a diocesan bishop of him ? 
If Wesley ordained Coke a bishop, he used the service of 
the Church of England. He must then have put this ques- 
tion to him : 

" Are you persuaded that you are truly called to this 
ministration, according to the will of our Lord Jesus 

Christ r 

And Coke answered, "I am so persuaded." 
And yet Mr. Wesley firmly believed at the same time 
that the office of a diocesan bisHop was not itself according 
to the will of Christ ! If I were a Methodist, and especially 
were I in your place, I never would insist upon so unreason- 
able and preposterous a thing as that Wesley ordained Coke 
a bishop, or designed for a diocesan bishop to be counten- 
anced by Methodists. He said he shuddered when he heard 
that Coke had assumed the name ! He said he had rather 
be called a knave than a bishop, as you are called, and 
require your people to call you. 

II. Did Mr. Wesley ordain or leave such an order 

IN HIS SOCIETY IN ENGLAND 1 

Not a vestige of it — nor are Methodists in England Epis- 
copal but Wesleyan Methodists, i. e., they carry out Mr. W.'s 
views of government. Did Mr. Wesley, then, ordain a 
bishop, and prefer Episcopacy ? 



\ 



LETTER VII 



The first Chapter of the Discipline wholly untrue — Methodists 
are deceived who believe it — Methodist History and John 
Wesley against it — John Wesley did not believe an Epis- 
copal bishop a Scriptural Order in the Ministry — He him- 
self would prefer to be called a knave, rascal, or scoundrel 
than bishop — The direct testimony of Bishop Bascom, D. D. 

Dear Sir : — Having shown in my last that Mr. Wesley 
frankly admitted that he did not believe that the Scriptures 
warranted three orders of ministers, or that such a minister 
as an Episcopal bishop was known in Paul's day, or among 
the primitive churches for centuries after Christ, how in the 
name of reason or consistency can Methodists — could the 
writers of the first chapter of the Discipline say, that Mr. 
Wesley preferred ax Episcopal Government. 

That he considered it without a scriptural warrant, we 
have seen above, and that he considered the powers claimed 
by prelatical bishops as positively anti-scriptural, we have 
seen from his Notes On the New Testament. Is there a 
Methodist in America who believes that Mr. Wesley was 
capable of preferring an unscriptural and anti-scriptural form 
of church government for his people, to a scriptural one ? 
Can a Methodist believe that Mr. Wesley ever appointed the 






76 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

office for the ordination of a bishop found in the Discipline, 
in which this is the first question, " Are you persuaded that 
you are truly called to this ministration, according- to the 
will of our Lord Jesus Christ 1 ?" Did Mr. Wesley de- 
mand an affirmative answer to this question from Dr. Coke 
when he ordained him 1 Could he believe that Dr. Coke 
could have been called to the office of a prelatical bishop 
according to the will and mind of Jesus Christ, when Mr. 
Wesley had declared that it was his firm conviction that 
Christ never had a " will" or wish for such an officer in his 
Church 1 

We not only have no proof in all his works, that he pre- 
ferred the Episcopal government, except his remaining a 
member of the Church of England, and save this fact, unless 
he appointed the Episcopacy for Methodism in America, we 
have the fullest evidence that he had strong objections to the 
third order of bishops. When Mr. Wesley learned that 
Mr. Asbury and Coke had established an Episcopal form of 
government in the United States, he addressed Mr. A. the 
following very pointed letter (See Wesley's Works, vol. vii. 
page 187, Letter to Asbury) : 

"London, Sept. 20th, 1788. 
" There is, indeed, a wide difference between the relation 
wherein you stand to the Americans, and the relation wherein 
I stand to all the Methodists. You are the elder brother of 
the American Methodists ; I am, under God, the father of 
the whole family. (Will Methodists deny that John Wesley 
was their father, and are they not then his children and fol- 
lowers?) Therefore, I naturally care for you all, in a man- 
ner no other person can do. Therefore, I, in a measure, 
provide for you all ; for the supplies which Dr. Coke pro- 
vides for you, he could not provide were it not for me— 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS, 77 

were it not, that I not only permit him to collect, but also 
support him in so doing. • . 

" But in one point, my dear brother, I am a little afraid 
the Doctor and you differ from me. I study to be little, 
you study to be great ; I creep, you strut along. I found a 
school, you a college. Nay, and call it after your own names ! 
O, beware ! Do not seek to be something ! Let me be 
nothing, and Christ be all in all. 

" One instance of this, of your greatness, has given me 
great concern. How can you, how dare you suffer yourself 
to be called a bishop ? I shudder, I start at the very thought. 
Men may call me & knave, or a fool, a rascal, a scoundrel, and 
I am content ; but they shall never, by my consent, call me 
a bishop ! For my sake, for God's sake, for Christ's sake, 
put a full end to this ! Let the Presbyterians do what they 
please, but let the Methodists know their calling better. 

" Thus, my dear Franky, I have told you all that is in 
my heart, and let this, when I am no more seen, bear wit- 
ness how sincerely I am your affectionate 

" Friend and brother, 

"John Wesley." 

Can a friend to Wesley believe that he preferred the 
Episcopal form of government, and yet looked upon its 
chief order, which makes it Episcopal, in such a light % Can 
any Methodist, who does not regard Mr. Wesley as a double- 
dealer, believe that he ordained Mr. Coke an Episcopal 
bishop, and directed him to ordain Mr. Asbury, and because 
they allowed themselves to be so called, chastise them in 
such language as the above ; language which, in these days 
of equality, a Christian man would scorn to use or receive 1 
With the above letter, together with Mr. Wesley's express 
conviction, that an Episcopal bishop was an unscriptural 



78 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

order or office, and the first chapter of the Discipline before 
me, what am I, and what must every Methodist who is in 
the least susceptible of the force of truth, compelled to con- 
clude 1 Am I not justifiable in deciding that the first chap- 
ter of the discipline is a tissue of falsehoods, or Mr. Wesley 
was a moral knave and a hypocrite 1 This imperiously de- 
mands a notice at your hands. You, sir, have endorsed this 
chapter with your own " sign manual," and sent it forth as 
an item of the faith of half a million of Methodists. Mr. 
Wesley was not the author of the chapter — it matters not 
who else was; you, sir, have endorsed it, and it becomes 
you to substantiate it, when its statements are challenged, 
unless you regard it as indefensible. 

But there is still another declaration which I also pro- 
nounce false, upon the authority of the standard histories of 
the society. It is the last clause of the chapter. "At which 
time the General Conference held at Baltimore, did unan- 
imously receive the said T. Coke and Francis Asbury as 
their bishops, being fully satisfied with the validity of their 
Episcopal ordination." 

Now so far as this being true, every line of it, as it is on 
my sheet, is according to the authorities before me, and one 
of them your own distinguished associate, Bishop Bascom, 
utterly untrue. 

The General Conference did not at that time, (i. e. the 
year they were ordained and sent over, or the year the Meth- 
odist Episcopal church was organized) receive Messrs. 
Coke and Asbury as bishops ; they did not admit the title 
until 1787 — three years after ! Nor did the Conference 
at first, or three years after, apply the title of bishops to them, 
either unanimously or at all. They assumed the title in 1787, 
and inserted it in the minutes without the consent of Con- 
ference — and at the next meeting begged it might stand. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 79 

Here is the history of the surreptitious introduction and 
origin of Methodist bishops. (See Musgrave, page 43.) 

" In the course of this year," (-1787, or three years after 
the organization of the Methodist Episcopal Church,) Mr. 
Asbury reprinted the General Minutes ; but in a different 
form from what they were before. The title of this pamph- 
let was as follows : 

" 'A form of Discipline for the Ministers, Preachers and 
Members of the Methodist Episcopal Church in America,' &c. 

"In this discipline, there were thirty-one sections, and 
sixty-three questions, with answers to them all. 

" The third question in the second section, and the answer, 
read thus : 

" 'Q. Is there any other business to be done in Conference?* 

" 'A. The electing and ordaining of bishops, elders, and 
deacons. 7 

" This was the first time that our superintendents ever 
gave themselves the title of bishops in the minutes. They 

CHANGED THE TITLE THEMSELVES WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF 

the Conference ; and at the next Conference they asked the 
preachers if the word bishop might stand in the minutes ; 
seeing that it was a Scripture name, and the meaning of the 
word bishop, was the same with that of superintendent."^. ! !] 

" Some of the preachers," continues Mr. Lee, " opposed 
the alteration, and wished to retain the former title ; but a 
majority of the preachers agreed to let the word bishop re- 
main ; and in the annual minutes for the next year, the first 
question is, 'Who are the bishops of our church for the 
United Stated?"— Zee's "Short History," $c, page 127. 

With this history before me, I do not hesitate to say with 
McCaine, Jennings, and others, that Methodist Episcopacy 
was introduced surreptitiously, by unlawful and dishonorable 
means. 



80 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

Nor was " Conference fully satisfied" with Coke and As- 
bury's "Episcopal ordination," if the other preachers were 
as dissatisfied with it as was Coke himself, whojiad his from 
the hands of the " father" and " founder" himself— and Mr. C. 
was of the decided impression that they desired a reordina- 
tion, or at least were willing to submit to it, from the hands of 
Episcopal bishops ! What will Methodists think when they 
learn that this Bishop Coke addressed a humiliating letter to 
Bishop White of the Protestant Episcopal Church, request- 
ing, I may say, begging, for valid Episcopal ordination at his 
hands!! He says in that letter, "He, (Mr. Wesley) did 
indeed solemnly invest me, so far as he had the right so to 
do, with Episcopal authority, but did not intend, I think, that 
our entire separation should take place. * * Our ordained 
ministers will not, ought not, to give up their right of admin- 
istering the sacraments, I don't think the generality of them, 
perhaps none of them, would refuse to submit to a reordination, 
if other hindrances (a classical education) were removed out 
of the way!!"* This letter, which Mr. Asbury very pro- 
perly asked Bishop White to " burn," unless he complied 
with his requests, is given, with one from Mr. White, in 
" History and Mystery of Methodism," pp. 24-27. Bishop 
White refused his request, and eight years after, Dr. Coke 
applied to the Bishop of London, requesting him to ordain a 
given number of preachers to travel through the connection 
in England, for the purpose of administering the sacraments 
agreeably to the usages of the Established Church. — Why 
should Dr. Coke request Episcopal ordination of Bishop 
White, if he was satisfied % Why did he say that perhaps 
all the other preachers would be reordained, if he would 
waive their ignorance 1 Why did Dr. Coke eight years after, 

* Drew's Life of Coke, page 288, quoted from McCaine by Musgrave. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 81 

seek ordination for a number of his preachers from the 
Bishop of London, if he was satisfied that he himself was 
possessed of Episcopal powers % \ Why did he not ordain 
them himself, since, if a bishop, he had equal authority with 
the Bishop of London 1 ? These facts speak too plainly — Mr. 
Coke knew and felt he was not a bishop, but he so coveted 
the honor, that he gave himself the name by fraudulently 
assuming the title, and at the next Conference begged that 
it might remain, urging that a superintendent and bishop 
were one and the same ! Why did he not claim the title 
upon the ground that Mr. Wesley had ordained him a 
bishop 1 He knew that Mr. W. did not, and had not the 
power to, ordain him an Episcopal bishop. 

IV. Mr. Wesley's Letter to his Societies in America 
is evidence against the truth of this Chapter. 

He says : " I have appointed Dr. Coke and Mr. Asbury 
to be joint superintendents over our brethren in America." 
The word bishop is not once mentioned. 

V. Mr. Coke's certificate of ordination is also evi- 
dence. 

It reads : " I have this day set apart as a superintendent, 
by the imposition of my hands and prayer," &c. Not one 
word about bishop. 

Finally : Neither Mr. Coke's letter nor the letter Mr. W. 
wrote, by him, to the brethren in America, mention that Mr. 
Wesley instructed or empowered Dr. Coke to ordain Mr. 
Asbury an Episcopal bishop, but Mr. Wesley distinctly says 
in the quotation I have given, that he himself had appointed 
Messrs. Coke and Asbury joint superintendents. 

The points which we have shown to be contrary to facts 
are : 

1. That Mr. Wesley preferred the episcopacy- -he did not 
believe in three orders of ministers. 
4* 



82 . THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

2. That he did ordain Dr. Coke an Episcopal bishop of 
the third order. 

3. That Mr. Wesley commissioned Dr. Coke to ordain 
Mr, Asbury an Episcopal bishop. Mr. W. says he ordained 
Messrs. Coke and Asbury himself "joint superintendents" 

4. That Asbury was ordained an Episcopal bishop. 

5. That "at which time [1784,"] the .General Conference, 
held at Baltimore did unanimously receive them as bishops 
— they did not dare assume the title until three years after- 
wards. 

6. The General Conference, did not receive them as bish- 
ops, — Coke and Asbury assumed the title, and moved by 
ambition surreptitiously changed the term superintendents 
into bishops. 

7. The Conference, when besought by these self-made 
bishops to allow the title to stand, were not unanimous, and 
never have been — a portion of the more reflecting, informed 
and consistent are not to this day satisfied. 

8. The Conference, if Mr. Coke is a fair representative of 
it, was not "fully" satisfied with their Episcopal ordination, 
for Mr. Coke was not satisfied with his own ! 

9. Mr. Wesley did not deliver Dr. Coke letters of Epis- 
copal ordination — only a certificate of sw&-superintendency. 

10. Nor did Mr. Wesley recommend Episcopacy to Amer- 
ican Methodists, as is implied in this chapter, so far as can 
be learned from his writings. . Mr. Wesley states in his let- 
ter, by Mr. Coke, to Methodists in America, "As our Amer- 
ican brethren are now totally disentangled, both from the 
State and from the English hierarchy, (Mr. Wesley here 
calls the English episcopacy a hierarchy ; would not Meth- 
odist episcopacy be a Methodist hierarchy ?) we dare not 
entangle them again with either one or the other •" Will 
Methodists say he did it by this same letter ? ! ! 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 83 

" They are now at full liberty, simply to follow the Scrip- 
tures and the primitive Church," and this, as we have seen, 
according to Mr. Wesley's views, would never have entan- 
gled them in a hierarchy— never would have furnished them 
with an Episcopal bishop. Did Mr. Wesley, in recommend- 
ing them to pattern after the Scriptures and the primitive 
Church, indicate that he preferred or recommended an Epis- 
copacy 1 

If my language and assertions respecting this first chapter 
are considered unwarrantably bold and reckless, we invite the 
especiar attention of all Methodists to the following testimo- 
ny of the late distinguished Bishop H. Bascom, D.D. That 
this is unquestionably the language of Bishop Bascom, I quote 
from Dr. Bond's Economy of Methodism, published by the 
Methodist Book Concern, 200 Mulberry st., N. Y* 

" If we can credit Mr. Wesley's declarations, it was never 
intended that the Methodists should become an ecclesiastical 
establishment, headed by an episcopal hierarchy, consisting of 
an indefinite number of incumbents, all possessing the same 
powers and ruling the same diocese. The model for such a 
state of things is not to be met with in the whole range of 
church history, except when four individuals at the same time 
claimed by divine right the chair of popedom in the Roman See. 
If the reader is startled at this, let him recollect that things 
that are alike in their nature and progress will be compared 

* I am preparing for the press one of the most remarkable, and, 
against the Methodist Hierarchy, the most potential little work ever 
offered to the world. It is the famous Declaration of Rights drawn 
up by Dr. Bascom, together with his inimitable essays upon the des- 
potic and tyrannical charater of Methodism, of which the above quo- 
tations are specimens. The friends of a republican Christianity should 
give this little work a wide circulation — it is the greatest argument, 
In the least space and cheapest form, ever published. — J. R. G. 



84 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

by the human mind, and classed accordingly."- — Bond's 
Economy of Methodism, pp. 118, 114. 

" But Mr. Wesley seems not to have contemplated an 
episcopacy in any shape. It is, to be sure, asserted, in the 
preface to our Book of Discipline ; but the oldest preachers 
in the United States, with whom I have conversed and cor- 
responded on this subject, never saw the warrant. It has 
been called for by friends and foes for thirty years, but is 
not yet forthcoming. If such warrant exists, why is it that 
we can learn nothing about it % " — Ibid., p. 114. 

" But until such document or warrant from Mr. Wesley 
be produced, /, as an individual, must, of necessity, continue 
to doubt the historical probity of the preface to our Boole of 
Discipline, in relation to this particular." — Ibid. 

"What had Wesleyan Methodism to do with our self- 
created and self-styled Episcopacy? For, I repeat it, Dr. 
Coke was only set apart as a superintendent of the American 
Methodists, and not ordained to a third office as a prelatical 
bishop. TFie ceremony of separation was only intended to 
confer Mr. Wesley's authority to oversee the American 
Methodists upon another, as Mr. Wesley could not attend to 
them in person. What did original Methodism know of our 
order of presiding elders % — one man having power to appoint 
seventy, to- overrule and remove at pleasure fourteen hun- 
dred 1 Where in the annals of original Methodism did the 
framers of our Discipline meet with the ceremony of ordi- 
nation for a bishop 1 ?" — Ibid. 

" The improvements proposed in our present form of 
government are openly denounced as ' innovations.' This 
is somewhat singular, when every man of information 
knows that our whole system of episcopacy in the United 
States is, to all intents and purposes, an * innovation ' upon 
the genius and plans of Wesleyan Methodism, and one ex- 



RHPUBMOANISM BACKWARDS. 85 

pressly disapproved and disavowed by Mr. Wesley." — Ibid. 
p. 114. 

" On the other hand, if our bishops and their pertinacious 
supporters as high-toned Episcopalians, ill as it may look 
(for such they really are), would yield and distribute 
throughout the different departments of the Church that part 
of their power that has come into their hands ' surrepti- 
tiously,' it would abate the honest inquietude of thousands, 
it would remove the just apprehensions of the discerning, 
and bring worthy multitudes into the bosom of the Method- 
ist Church, whose names, as things now are, will never adorn 
our calendar." — Ibid., p. 115. 

" 4th. From the preceding facts it appears, that the intro- 
duction of Episcopacy among the Methodists in the United 
States, so far from being ' recommended ' by Mr. Wesley, was 
expressly disapproved and forbidden, and the proceedings of 
the General Conference of 1784, in establishing diocesan 
Episcopacy among us, was in open violation of the instruc- 
tions of Mr. Wesley ; and I now take the liberty of saying 
to the Kev. William M'Kendree, Enoch George, Robert R. 
Roberts, Joshua Soule, and Elijah Hedcling, that a statement 
on this subject, to which I find their names subscribed, in the 
preface to our Book of Discipline, is believed by many to be 
a perversion of historical fact, and they are hereby pub- 
licly called upon to furnish some evidence of the truth of the 
aforesaid statement ; or leave us to infer that such evidence 
cannot be produced. In justice, however, to these distin- 
guished individuals in the Methodist Episcopal Church, I 
would say distinctly, 1 believe they are all innocent of hav- 
ing made this statement originally, but they have made it 
their own, by giving it the sanction of their names, as I have 
not been able to learn that this preface has ever been sanc- 
tioned by any General Conference : if it has, upon learning it 



86 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

I shall make (should God preserve my life) a similar call on 
the next General Conference, as the proper organ of infor- 
mation : at present the bishops appear to be the only re- 
sponsible persons, and on them I call. Should the policy 
of the cabinet induce them to remain silent, as heretofore on 
similar occasions, I shall take the liberty of thinking they 
cannot answer me, without damage to their own cause, which, 
it would seem, must be supported by silence. 5th. As it is 
in proof before the reader that Methodist Episcopacy can 
derive no support from the name or sanction of Mr. Wesley, 
both having been definitely withheld, so also does it admit of 
proof that the great body of Methodist ministers and mem- 
bers in the United States were not consulted at all in the 
adoption of this enormously mis-shapen system of aristo- 
cratic government. It was the undivulged project, the 
favorite scheme of a few master spirits, who, meeting in 
secret conclave and excluding the junior members even of 
their own body (as living witnesses declare), acknowledging 
no constitutional rights, and comprehending no legislative 
privileges as belonging to any except themselves, proceeded 
to the hasty formation of the present plan of government 
among us, and unblushingly palmed it upon posterity as the 
offspring of Mr. Wesley 's wisdom and experience. 6th. The 
spurious origin of Methodist Episcopacy, is to be inferred 
from the fact that those very individuals who made these pre- 
tensions were unsettled, and felt misgivings on the subject. 

" Dr. Coke, in a letter to Bishop White of Philadelphia, 
doubts the power of Mr. Wesley to confer legitimate episco- 
pal authority ; he does the same in a letter to the Bishop of 
London, written subsequently, in both of which he modestly 
asks for reordination." — Ibid., p. 117. • 

"In the present preface to our Book of Discipline, the 
adoption of our present form of government is attributed to 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 87 

the express instructions of Mr. Wesley ; but the venerable 
Wesley has, unequivocally, disavowed the honor, and no one 
has ever shown or quoted . the document, paper, or verbal 
instructions of Mr. Wesley. It is now nearly a year since 
all our bishops were respectfully invited to furnish informa- 
tion on this subject, if they had any to furnish ; they have 
not even deigned a reply of any kind : passing by the un- 
courteousness of such an act, and the insult it offers to the 
wishes of inquiring thousands, who, it is known to the bishops, 
feel a deep interest in the subject, I shall plead their apo- 
logy, by taking it for granted that they would have replied 
if they had been able to do so, without defacing the beauty 
of those institutions ; received from their fathers,' many of 
whom are still living ; or, perhaps, like the Chinese histo- 
rians, they are unacquainted with their own origin, because 
their living fathers conceal it. 

" But finally, Mr. Asbury pleads his authority as a Method- 
ist bishop, on the following grounds : '1st, Divine authority. 
2d, Seniority in America. 3d, Election of the General Con- 
ference, 1784. 4th, Ordination of Coke, Otterbine, What- 
coat, and Vasey. 5th, Because the signs of the apostle were 
found in him.' See Asbury's Journal for May, 1805, vol iii., 
page 191. No 'succession' directly hinted at here, no allu- 
sion to Mr. Wesley. On this expose of the arcana of Method- 
ist Episcopacy, I would only say : it is plain Mr. Asbury 
is here speaking of himself as a bishop of the third order, 
and superior to presbyters. Of his ' divine authority' we can 
say nothing, only we know it was not received from the 
Scriptures. As to ' seniority' we have yet to learn that it 
ever creates any new civil or religious rights. With regard 
to the vote of the ' General Conference-' electing Mr. Asbury, 
it is only necessary to observe, they might have acted unad- 
visedly in this vote :.f the Conference of 1784 as well as in 



88 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

others ; and we know that many of the acts :£ that very- 
Conference have been since repealed, as improper and disad- 
vantageous. On the subject of ' ordination,' as it was only 
an ordination by presbyters, we cannot admit its ' episcopal 
validity,' if more be meant than a presbyter. As it respects 
the last item, the signs of an apostle can only be seen in an 
avostle, and of course have not been seen since the apostolic 
age. Thus the reader will perceive that our ' fathers ' acted 
a palpably inconsistent part in the introduction of Episcopacy 
among us, and have been under the necessity (created by 
their own indiscretion) of acting an equally awkward, and I 
fear posterity will think ridiculous part, in defending them- 
selves against the charge of a reckless usurpation of un- 
warranted power." — Ibid., pp. 116, 117. 

What will the world say to this chapter, which is the Char- 
ter Methodist bishops profess to have received from Mr. 
Wesley, to authorize them to rule and lord it over his heri- 
tage'? ! Is it not most evidently a tissue of false statements 
and a mass of misrepresentations ? Does it not bear the 
boldest evidence of having been fixed up with great pains 
by the bishops to deceive the people into the belief and sup- 
port of Methodist Episcopacy ? What a striking disagree- 
ment between it and Mr. W.'s relation of the transaction ! 
In this, the bishop's chapter, the term Episcopacy is used six 
times, as if for fear that Methodists, easy as they are to believe 
and take without examination every thing their ministers 
state from the press or pulpit, would not believe that Wesley 
did what he had not the power to do, and what he considered 
as unscriptural, ordain a bishop — a term, we have shown ; 
not used by Mr. Wesley in either Mr. Coke's certificate or 
Mr. Wesley's letter to the Churches ! Am I not forced to 
believe that Messrs. Coke and Asbury, who made them- 
selves bishops with their pens, also wrote this chapter, and 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 89 

introduced the office for the consecration of a bishop, from 
the Episcopal Prayer Book, into the Discipline % 

Will you avoid the verdict of the boldest assumption and 
most unwarrantable misrepresentation by these bishops to 
gain and preserve their power, by intimating that a Method- 
ist Bishop is not a third order, but only an office of the sec- 
ond ? Why then the third and distinct ordination % Why use 
the very office by which an English prelatical bishop is con- 
secrated'? Why is the government and control of all the 
other ministers committed to his sovereign will % But let 
Methodist historians and D.D.'s settle this. 

Dr. Emory. " In whatever sense distinct ordinations con- 
stitute distinct orders, in the same sense Mr. Wesley cer- 
tainly intended that we should have three orders. For he 
undeniably instituted three distinct ordinations" 

Rev. N. Bangs, D. D., and Rev. J. Emory, D. D. 
" THREE ORDERS of ministers are recognized, and the 
duties peculiar to each are clearly defined." — See Buck's 
Theological Dictionary, edition 1825. 

Here I leave the history of the Mystery of Methodism 
and the rise of Methodist Prelatical Episcopacy, to save Mr. 
Wesley from the charge of preferring and appointing a 
government and order of ministers he regarded as hierarchi- 
cal and unscriptural, we must conclude that the creation of 
Methodist Episcopacy, and the palming of it off as Mr. Wes- 
ley's, to secure its adoption, was the work of those who as- 
sumed the lordly title of Bishops, and furnished a bold in- 
stance of clerical ambition and fraud, by which priestcraft 
has ever sought to advance itself at the sacrifice of truth and 
the rights of the laity. If these discrepancies are unreal, you 
can explain them, if they are capable of explanation ; if they 
are not, let your silence be the outward and visible sign and 
seal of their absurdity and falsehood. 



LETTER VIII 



METHODISM AS IT WAS. 

Its origin and design, to study the Classics — Methodism ivith- 
out either altar or divinity — Its members and preachers all 
unconverted — Westers conviction and conversion — His ex- 
perience. 

A serious question : — Who may be said to be the originator 
and instigator of the works and devices of wicked men ? 

Dear Sir : — I know of no greater contrast than that exist- 
ing between " Methodism as it was," in its origin, and " Me- 
thodism as it is " at present among us. I have not the least 
idea that the founder of the scheme, were he to revisit the 
walks of life, would know that it was Methodism, or recognize 
it as his offspring. If the Church of England needed re- 
form, Methodism needs it to-day. In sketching the history 
of Methodism, I shall confine myself to Wesley's own writ- 
ings, and those of approved Methodist authors. It will there- 
fore be wholly unnecessary for you to reply, unless to cor- 
rect me when I am led into error by your writers. 

"In 1729, two young men in England, (Charles and John 
Wesley, members of the Church of England, and the latter 
a minister,) reading the Bible, saw they could not be saved 

(90) 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 91 

without holiness, followed after it, and incited others to do 
so." 

These two were joined by two others. They had their 
regular meetings together, following " after holiness," in the 
following manner : 

" In November, 1729, at which time I came to reside at 
Oxford, my brother and I, and two young gentlemen more, 
agreed to spend three or four evenings in a week together. 
On Sunday evening we read something in divinity, on other 
nights the Greek and Latin classics." 

This, I learn from Mr. Wesley, was the origin of Metho- 
j dism, which you call upon me and the world to regard and 
fellowship as the Church of Christ. That I am not mistaken, 
I quote Wesley's own words : 

"On Monday, May 1st, our little Society began in Lon- 
don. But it may be observed, the first rise of Methodism, 
so called, was in November, 1729, when four of us met to- 
gether at Oxford." 

I have found the Methodist Church (?) in its origin com- 
posed of four unregenerate young men. Its meetings were 
held three or four nights in the week, and its worship was, 
not the reading of the Bible, not prayer or singing, for not 
one of these employments are mentioned, but reading the 
Greek and Latin classics! Pretty employment for a Chris- 
tian Church, truly ! ! 

On Sunday, something in Divinity ! No Bible mentioned 
as read at any meeting — no prayer offered — no song sung ! 
And yet this is all the Methodist Church was at its origin ! ! 
Am I not justified in saying that it was not a Christian 
Church'? That it has no more or juster claims to the title 
than a College Society or Masonic Lodge? You know I 
am justified. You dare not say that Methodism, in 1729, 
was a Christian Church — was even a Religious Society, or 



92 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

its meetings religious convocations, or even one of its four 
members Christians ! No, sir, your tongue will never say- 
it, nor your pen write it. And if Methodism then was not 
a Church of Christ, Methodism now is not, and ought not to 
be so called, for it is what it ever was, a human institute, 
purely of man and not of God. 

These young men the following summer commenced visit- 
ing prisons, the poor, and the sick, and were joined by a 
young man from Merton College. 

In April, 1732, Mr. Clayton joined them, and by his ad- 
vice they began to observe the fasts of the ancient \i. e., 
Catholic] Church, every Wednesday and Friday. The first 
religious rite observed in this young Church^) of unre- 
generate men, was a Romish one ! ! penance ! ! " Two or 
three of his pupils, one of my brothers, and two or three of 
mine, and Mr. Broughton, of Exeter College, desired like- 
wise to spend six evenings in a week with us, from 6 to 9 
o'clock, partly in reading and considering a chapter in the 
Greek Testament, and partly in close conversation." The 
worship of the Methodist Society still is purely of the " Greek 
and Latin classics" — it is without a gospel, an altar, and a 
song of praise. " To these were added, the next year, Mr. 
Ingham, with two or three other gentlemen of Queen's Col- 
lege ; then Mr. Hervey ; and in the year 1735, Mr. Geo. 
Whitefield. I think, at this time, we were 14 or 15 in num- 
ber, all of one heart (i. e. unregenerate doubtless, as Charles 
and John Wesley were) and one mind," {%. e. carnal.) 

Such was the Methodist Society in England up to the year 
1735. How conformed to the model and pattern of the 
New Testament Churches ! How scriptural in its member- 
ship, and especially in its worship ! It is to be remarked, 
that at this time it did not sprinkle infants ! 

When the Wesleys left for Georgia, Methodism waned at 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 93 

Oxford, but it was translated to America. Wesley says 
that " the second rise of Methodism was at Savannah, in 
April, 1736, when twenty or thirty persons met at my 
house." He writes from Georgia of this Society, thus : 
"After the evening service, as many of my parishioners 
(not Christians, necessarily) as desire it meet at my house 
(as they do on Wednesday evening) and spend about an 
hour in prayer, singing and mutual exhortation. A smaller 
number (most of those who desire to communicate the next 
day,) meet here on Saturday evening; and a few of these 
come to me on the other evenings, and pass half an hour in 
the same employment." 

This, Mr. Wesley tells us, was the second rise of Metho- 
dism. But I cannot for the life of me see any thing that 
will justify its being called a Christian Church, or even a 
Christian Society. 

The third and last rise, he says, " was at London, on this 
day, May 1st, 1737, when forty or fifty of us agreed to meet 
together every Wednesday evening, in order to a free con- 
versation, (about what, the Greek and Latin classics?) begun 
and ended with singing and prayer."* 

" In January, 1739, our Society, (Mr. Wesley did not pre- 
sume to call it a Church) consisted of about sixty persons. 
It continued gradually increasing all the year. In April I 
went down to Bristol, and soon after a few persons agreed 
to meet weekly, with the same intention as those in Lon- 
don."! These meetings, at first purely literary, seem now 
to be only social conversational meetings, and begun and 
ended with prayer, as modern Singing Schools, and as Tem- 
perance and Odd Fellows' Lodges are. We can discover 
nothing to give them a claim to the title of Christian Church. 

* Wesley's Works, vol. vii., p. 348. 
f Wesley's Works, vol. vii., p. 349. 



94 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

We have seen Methodism fairly begun, and traced its 
history minutely for ten years, up to 1739 ; from this period 
it commences to spread rapidly in every direction, Societies 
of the above feature formed in different towns and cities of 
England, and John Wesley assuming the control of them, 
dictating sundry rules and regulations to them, from time to 
time, appointing leaders, exhorters, and preachers, &c. 

It might be well to pause here and enquire in what do 
Methodist writers regard Methodism at this point ? What 
title claim for it, and what it is designed to effect % Was it 
in Mr. Wesley's wildest dreams that it was a Church, or 
that it ought to be one % 

We quote from Methodism, by lnskip, pages 37, 38 : 

" But this organization was not a distinct sect, holding a pai'- 
ticular formal creed, or prescribing any exclusive method and 
ceremonies of worship. It was a Society in the Church. 
Hence, those connected with the ' Societies,' were earnestly 
and repeatedly warned of the evil of separating from the 
Church. They were also urged to attend the ordinances, and 
receive the sacraments, as administered by the Church." 

Dr. Bond in his work, entitled " Economy of Methodism," 
page 17, says : 

" Le^ it be remembered that no original purpose of estab- 
lishing a separate sect or denomination of people entered into 
the design of Mr. Wesley and his coadjutors. They only 
designed to waken up the different protestant denominations, 
and especially the Church of England, to a just apprehension 
of the renovating influence of gospel truth and of the impor- 
tance of Christian discipline." They were Societies in the 
Church of England. 

Such was Methodism prior to and during the Eevolution 
in this country. There were Methodists in all denomina- 
tions, because Methodism was no Church, but only a sort of 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 95 

Union Society, like union prayer and social meetings, for the 
purpose of seeking and promoting personal piety, and had 
it continued such only, I would not lift my voice or pen 
against it ; but its ambitious leaders have set it up as a 
Church, and claim for it all the regard and consideration 
claimed in God's word for the Church of Christ, and as such 
I repudiate it as Antichristian, a mock Church, a rival and 
traitorous fold, to mislead those who would otherwise follow 
Christ. 

Let it be distinctly noticed, that it was not necessary for 
one to be a Christian to be a Methodist, no more than it is 
to-day, but only to desire to be one. " Only one condition 
is required, a real desire to save their souls." No candid 
man will maintain that this is the only condition necessary 
to entitle one to membership in the Church of Christ. We 
suppose the man does not live who does not desire to be 
saved, and are all then qualified for Church membership 1 

Did Mr. Wesley intend to form a Church 1 Mr. Inskip 
says, " In the beginning, Mr. Wesley did not conceive the 
idea of forming a Society at all. Afterward, however, he 
(not Jesus Christ, not an apostle, not an angel, but he, John 
Wesley, priest of the Church of England) consummated such 
an organization as he found (taught or exampled in the New 
Testament ? No, he did not consult that but as he found) 
to be suitable and necessary. But this organization was not 
a distinct sect, holding a particular formal creed, or pre- 
scribing any exclusive method and ceremonies of worship. 
It was a Society in the Church, (i. e. of England.) Very 
well, so long as it was only a Society in the Church of 
England, for the cultivation of personal religion, I find no 
fault — possibly it effected good — but this point I do main- 
tain, if it was only a Society while in the Church of England, 
it is certain that it is only a Society when out of it. Its 



96 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

separation from the Church of England did not make it the 
Church of Christ. It is nothing more, and can be, so long 
as it is Methodism, nothing more this day than a human 
Society, devised at first and now governed by ambitious 
men ; and those who support it obey and follow men, not 
Christ, and in their practice set the work device and autho- 
rity of men above the wisdom and authority of our Lord 
Jesus Christ. Mr. Inskip seems to be penetrated with the 
conviction that his Church is but a sham Church. He claims 
for Methodism but little more than Masonry claims to be, 
and nothing more than the American Bible Society is — a 
" system'''' — not a Church, but only a system or scheme of a 
religious and moral enterprise ! " Methodism is not a mere 
sectarian form of Christianity, but a system of religious and 
moral enterprise.'''' Page 40. Again, he says, "A more 
wise or better arranged system of religious and moral enter- 
prise, could not have been conceived. Of course, like all 
other HUMAN INSTITUTIONS, it has its defects and 
imperfections !" Page 65. Here Mr. Inskip frankly 
admits that it is a human institution, and an imperfect and 
defective scheme. May I allow him to tell us here who 
devised the System ? See page 54 : 

"Finally, it may be said, Methodism in England and 
America, was a special system." 

" To meet the emergency which then existed, God raised 
up a company of great men — men who were great in intel- 
lectual endowment, moral excellence, and inventive genius. 
There was John Wesley, who has justly been designated the 
greatest of ecclesiastical legislators— Whitefield, the most 
extraordinary of pulpit orators — Charles Wesley, among 
the best of sacred poets — Coke, the Leader of modern mis- 
sionaries — Asbury, the most laborious of bishops — and 
Clark and Benson, one the most learned, the other the best 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 97 

practical commentator ever known. These men devised 

THIS POWERFUL INSTRUMENTALITY, WELL STYLED ' CHRIST- 
IANITY IN EARNEST.' " 

" Every agency they could command, however novel and 
irregular, they used with energy and enthusiasm." 

The Wesley s, Whitefield, Coke, Asbury, Clark and Ben- 
son, then devised Methodism. They did not copy it from 
the Bible, or mould it according to the teachings of Christ, 
or conform it to the model Church, built by Christ, or Mr. 
Inskip would not say it was a human institution, or devised 
by the above men ! Will Methodist Christians think in 
what fold they are, whom they are following'? and what 
institution they are supporting ! 

To show still more clearly that " Methodism as it was," 
was a far different thing from " Methodism as it is," with its 
lofty and hollow pretensions, as well as to show that it is 
understood by the intelligent, we quote from the February- 
number of the North British Review : 

" For a long time even after the societies under his care 
had become very numerous, he would not allow his preachers 
to assemble their people during the ordinary hours of public 
worship on the Lord's day, and to the last he refused to give 
them a general permission to administer the sacraments. 
The peojrfe who joined him, he wished to remain still members 
of the Established Church, to attend upon her worship, and to 
receive sealing ordinances in her communion. This is the 
position still maintained by that section of his followers who 
call themselves Primitive Methodists. Wesley's plans and 
arrangements were directed so as to afford to those who 
joined his Society, advantages for growing in grace, for 
adorning their profession, and for promoting the interests of 
religion, additional to those they might possess as members 
of the Church of England and attenders upon her ordinances. 
5 



98 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

He did not intend to form a distinct and separate Church, 
and in point of fact did not do so. He does not seem to have 
reached any convictions, which appeared to him to make it 
men's duty to disapprove of the constitution of the Church 
of England, or to separate from her communion. So that 
Wesley an Methodism, under its founder, was not a Church, 
and did not profess to be a Church, but only an Institute, 
regulated in its arrangements by present and temporary cir- 
cumstances, and supplementary to the Church of England 
for promoting the Christian good of the community." 

" Different considerations seem to show that Wesleyan- 
ism even yet scarcely professes to be a scripturally organ- 
ized Church, and if so, it must be, in respect to its organiza- 
tion, a device of human wisdom, and therefore not destined 
to perpetuity, not fitted for permanence." 

" Wesley did not profess to be organizing a Church upon 
a scriptural basis. His Institute (Methodism) was the pro- 
duct of his own wisdom and sagacity, and must be subject to 
the fluctuations and instability of all merely human things." 

What unparalleled effrontery, then, for Methodists, in the 
face of these facts, to declare that their Society is a Christian 
Church, and scripturally organized ! 

Before I close this epistle I would enquire into the pecu- 
liar qualifications of the Wesleys to found a Christian Church, 
or a religious Society, for they organized the Methodist So- 
ciety, while Coke and Asbury assumed for it the name and 
pretensions of a Church. 

Mr. Wesley was ordained a Deacon of the Church of 
England in 1725, and received priest's orders about three 
years afterwards, 1728. 

In 1735, ten years after his first ordination and six years 
after he and his brother Charles had started Methodism at 
Oxford, they both sailed for Georgia, to convert the Indians. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 99 

He was so ill-suited with the people of Georgia, and they so 
displeased with him as a minister, that he relinquished his 
scheme and fled from America, in the face of a civil prosecu- 
tion for malfeasance in office, and improper behavior towards 
a Mrs. ' Williamson. See his Journal, vol. iii., p. 42. On his 
return, and afterwards falling in with Peter Bohler, a pious 
Moravian, he became convinced that he was unregenerate. 
" This, then, I have learned in the ends of the earth — that I 
am fallen short of the glory of God ; that my whole heart 
is altogether corrupt and abominable. I am a child of wrath, 
an heir of hell. I left my native country in order to teach 
the Georgian Indians the nature of Christianity ; but what 
have I learned myself the mean time'? Why, (what I the 
least of all suspected,) that I, who went to America to con- 
vert others, was never myself converted to GW."* This was 
written January 29, 1738. He became a penitent enquirer, 
and in May following, (Wednesday 24th,) obtained satisfac- 
tory evidence to himself of having passed from death unto 
life. He says, " In the evening I went unwillingly to a So- 
ciety in Aldersgate street, where one was reading Luther's 
preface to the Epistle to the Romans. About a quarter 
before nine, while he was describing the change which God 
works in the heart, through faith in Christ, I felt my heart 
strangely warmed. I felt I did trust in Christ alone for 
salvation ; and an assurance was given me that he had taken 
away my sins, even mine, and saved me from the law of 
sin and death. "f 

That I have not misrepresented Mr. Wesley, I quote the 
concurrent testimony of Mr. Inskip. Pp. 19, 20. 

" He labored some time among the colonists, with con- 



* Wesley's Works, vol. iii., p. 53. 
f Wesley's Works, vol. iii., p. 74, 



100 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

siderable perplexity and discouragement. He returned to 
England, and under the wise and faithful teaching of Peter 
Bohler, was led to apprehend the truth as it is in Jesus. 
After earnestly struggling to obtain the blessing of God, he 
was enabled to ' lay hold of the hope set before him,' and 
rejoiced in the knowledge of salvation by the remission of 
sin." 

His brother Charles professed a change of heart May 3d, 
1738. 

From his history we learn that John Wesley had been 
preaching thirteen years before he was a converted man 
himself! Thus while in an unregenerate state, a wicked 
sinner before God, and nine years before he was a converted 
man, he and his brother Charles, also a sinner like himself, 
devised and set on foot the Methodist Society ! It would be 
wrong for Christians to follow or obey in religion the bright- 
est and purest angel — Christ never authorized an angel to 
devise a Church for his children, much less men, and how 
infinitely much less unconverted men. If it did not seem too 
severe, I would ask you this question : 

Are not all sinners, of their father the Devil, and do not 
they do his will and obey his behests ] See John viii., 44 ; 
and Rom. vi., 16, 20. Methodism is the work and device of 
ungodly men; in whose will did it have its origin 1 ? Let 
Christian Methodists consider well the fact, they are support- 
ing with all their talents and influence a system which they 
have been taught to look upon as a veritable Church of 
Christ, but which in fact is a human system, devised, and set 
on foot, and directed, by unconverted and unregenerate men ! 
How w^ill they answer -the serious interrogative of the 
Saviour, "Why call ye me Lord, Lord, and do not the 
things 1 command jou 1 ?" And how will they reconcile 
their discipleship with the test given by Christ, " If any man 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 101 

will be my disciple, let him deny himself, and take up his 
cross and follow me." 

They certainly are not following Christ while they enter 
the folds and follow the teachings of John Wesley, and sub- 
mit to his authority, and that of his successors, instead of 
Jesus Christ alone. 

Is it not virtually rejecting Christ — his authority — his 
laws, and casting reproach upon his Church, for a Christian 
or a sinner to turn his back upon it, and enter into, and give 
all his influence to support and build up a rival society, and 
that, too, devised by confessedly anregenerate men ? Is it 
not exalting a human society above the churches of Christ % 
Is it not offering a flagrant insult to the blessed Saviour % I 
beg and entreat of you, sir, and of your brethren, to think 
of these questions seriously, and decide them upon your 
knees before God. 



LETTER IX, 



METHODISM IN GEORGIA IN 1736. 

John and Charles Wesley sail for Georgia to convert the In- 
dians, and to plant Methodism in America — Trouble on 
shipboard — Immersion of Mary Welch — Mr. W.'s ad- 
mission — Difficulty on land — Mrs. Parker s child — Mr. 
Wesley charged by his brother of being quarrelsome — 
Trouble with a lady — Mr. Wesley a rejected lover — His 
revenge — Is apprehended, tried and condemned — Flees from 
justice, and leaves Savannah by night — Seeks the sea coast 
and sails for England. 

Dear Sir : — The history of Methodism sketched in these 
letters would not be complete unless I follow it to America, 
and notice some phases of it here. There is not much re- 
markable to note, but features are developed in Georgia 
which have strongly characterized Methodism and Method- 
ists until the present day. 

In 1735, Messrs. Wesley felt called of God, or of some 
body else, to go to America to convert the Indians, although 
they were unconverted men themselves ! Accordingly they 
set sail October 14, in the good ship Simmonds, accompanied 
by Mr. Ingham and Dela Motte. We have now the em- 

(102) 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 103 

bodiment of Methodism on the Simmonds afloat, and steer- 
ing for the coast of Georgia, North America. 

Mr. Wesley behaved himself very well — studying German 
and reading his prayers, except he became mortally terrified 
in every flurry or storm, which fact, to use his own words, 
plainly showed him that he was unfit to die. 

Having been on board about three weeks, when Mr. 
Wesley discovered his disposition to meddle with the regu- 
lations of the ship, and to raise a general disturbance among 
officers and men, because he claimed that he and his friends 
— the Methodist Society — did not receive water enough. 
New officers are appointed to satisfy Mr. Wesley. He does 
not deny the charge which the excluded officers prefer against 
him, i. e. of raising all the disturbance and procuring their 
discharge; he says, "they* were highly exasperated as to 
whom they imputed the change." — Wesley's Works, vol. iii. 

P . 11. 

Remark. — Interference and dictation in the concerns of 
others, which they have a strange way of making their own, 
are too characteristic of Methodists among us. 

After this, all things went on aboard as usual, with abun- 
dance of reading prayers, as storms and blows were frequent, 
until Thursday, February 5, 1736, the ship entered Savan- 
nah river, and cast anchor near Tybee's Island. Friday, 
February 6th, about eight in the morning, the first Methodist 
set foot on American soil, upon a small uninhabited island, 
over against Tybee, some twenty miles below Savannah. I 
have been thus particular in noting the " Plymouth Rock" of 
Methodism, as some General Conference might see fit to 
hold a session there, or do something else commemorative 
of the planting of Methodism in Georgia by John Wesley, 
and his first and last landing on this continent. It was over 
against Tybee Island in the Savannah river. On Saturday 



104 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

he was visited by a German preacher, and interrogated aj on 
personal religion, at which Mr. Wesley, the great founder of 
a new Church, which you call a Church of Christ, " was sur- 
prised, and knew not what to answer." Poor man, he was a 
stranger to religion, though as pious as a Pharisee. The 
next item I note in his Journal, is that famous entry of 
Saturday, February 21, 1736 — "Mary Welch, aged eleven, 
was baptized according to the custom of the first Church, and 
the rule of the Church of England, by immersion. The child 
was ill then, but recovered from that hour." 

Now, sir, as this has been denied being in Wesley's 
Journal, as it is also denied that Wesley ever intimated that 
immersion was the, not a, custom, (as though only one of the 
modes, but the, which implies the solitary and peculiar custom) 
of the apostolic Church, I appear to you, sir, in this case, if I 
have not given a correct transcript of the Journal entry for 
Saturday the 21st. If I have not, please correct me; if I 
have, no correction or remark is needed. I would call the 
attention of the reader of these letters, especially of Baptists, 
that Mr. Wesley does not say he baptized Mary Welch, as 
he is often, , doubtless, represented as saying, but simply 
that Mary Welch was baptized by immersion ; he does not 
say by whom, and it makes not a straw's difference — 
Wesley says distinctly that immersion was the custom of the 
ancient Church. This was his faith as a scholar, a graduate, 
and a Fellow of Oxford College. 

On Sunday, March 7, 1736, Mr. Wesley entered upon 
his ministry at Savannah, and preached from the 13th 
chapter of 1st Corinthians. 

In his Journal of Saturday, April 17, I ind an account of 
the formation of the first Methodist Society in America. 
He says, "Not finding, as- yet, any door open forthe(?) 
pursuing our main design, we considered in what manner we 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 105 

might be useful to the little flock at Savannah ; and we 
agreed, 1. To advise the more serious among them to form 
themselves into a sort of little Society, and to meet once or 
twice a week, in order to reprove, instruct, and exhort one 
another. 2. To select out of these a smaller number for a 
more intimate union with each other, which might be for- 
warded, partly by our conversing singly with each, and partly 
by inviting them all together to our house, and this we deter- 
mined to do every Sunday, in the afternoon." 

Here we see what Methodism was in its incipiency, simply 
a prayer or social meeting — how useful and well calculated 
to accomplish its design, i. e. to secure and cultivate personal 
religion. Contrast Methodism in 1736, and the monster 
power that clerical ambition has now made of it. Let 
Methodists ponder this well. 

I find another entry in the Journal, about which much has 
been, and is said and written, which is positively denied. 
It reads, " Wednesday, May 5. I was asked to baptize a 
child of Mr. Parker's, second bailiff of Savannah, but Mrs. 
Parker told me, ' Neither Mr. Parker nor I will consent to 
its being dipped.'' I answered, ' If you certify that your child 
is weak, it will suffice (the Rubric says) to pour water upon 
it.' She replied, * Nay, the child is not weak, but I am 
resolved it shall not be dipped.' This argument I could not 
confute, so I went home, and the child was baptized (what 
was done to it ?) by another person." 

The above extract from the Journal, which you will not 
contradict, shows conclusively three things : 

1st. That the general practice of the Church of England, 
at this period, 1736, was to immerse healthy children. The 
case of Mary Welch corroborates this. 

2d. That the strict construction of the Rubric was falling, 
or beginning to fall, into disuse, since one was found 
5* 



106 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

who would sprinkle (for we suppose Mrs. Parker had her 
own way) the child, although its parents certified that it was 
not weak, which was a palpable violation of the Rubric. 

3d. That Mr. Wesley was a firm believer in immersion 
being the only Christian or admissible baptism, except in case 
of sickness, or he would not have presumed to incur the dis- 
pleasure of the bailiff of Savannah. It must have been 
because of his conscientious scruples, his scriptural reasons, 
and not his fear of modifying the rules of the Church of 
England, for we find him charged by the grand jury, with 
1st. Not declaring his adherence to the Church of England;" 
and 2d. " With dividing the morning service on Sunday." 

As additional and conclusive proof that we are correct, we 
quote the following from the Life of Wesley, by Henry 
Moore, vol. 1st, page 425, published for the Methodist 
Episcopal Church in 1824. Moore was the only surviving 
trustee of Mr. Wesley's MSS : 

" When Mr. Wesley baptized adults professing faith in 
Christ, he chose to do it by trine immersion, if the persons 
would submit to it, judging this to be the apostolic method of 
baptizing. October 26th, he says, ' I baptized Mr. Wigging- 
ton in the river by Baptist Mills, and went on my way 
rejoicing, to French Hay." This was in 1739. 

We claim Wesley as an immersionist, when put upon his 
scholarship. 

At this time, June 3d, indications of Mr. Wesley's exceed- 
ing unpopularity is evident from the fact that only one 
family came to the communion. Mr. Wesley says it was 
owing to a few words which a woman had spoken, that set 
the whole town in a blaze. We shall hear more about a 
woman. 

On Tuesday, the 22a, Mr. Wesley writes, " Observing 
much coldness in Mr. 's behavior, I asked him the 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARD. 107 

reason of it. He answered, { I like nothing you do. All 
your sermons are satires (there could not be much of the 
spirit of religion, for Mr. "W. was not converted until two 
years after this) upon particular persons, (i. e. personal 
attacks) therefore I will never hear you more, and all the 
people are of my mind, for we wont hear ourselves abused. 
Besides, they say, they are Protestants, but as for you, they 
cannot tell what religion you are of. (Not at all strange, 
poor fellow, he had no religion !) They never heard of such 
a religion before. They do not know what to make of it. 
And then your private behavior — all the quarrels that 
have been here since you came, have been long of you. 
Indeed, there is neither man nor woman in the town who 
minds a word you say." 

We can testify that like founder like people. The facility 
with which Methodists can to this day promote quarrels, and 
throw a whole town or neighborhood into ferment and con- 
tention, is becoming widely noticed, and it is passing into a 
proverb, " they beat the Methodists to quarrel." It was so 
with their father John, whether in England or Georgia. This 
is one of the striking characteristics of Methodism every 
where— it must rule supreme and absolutely, or it will "quar- 
rel" with all who will not yield to its direction. 

A difficulty arose between Mr. Wesley arid some one in 
Carolina, who w T ould marry Mr. Wesley's parishioners with- 
out license. Mr. Wesley took a journey away to Charleston 
to complain to his bishop, and did not leave until bishop 
Gadsden promised to see the fellow should offend no more. 
Mr. Wesley had a storm at sea and almost a shipwreck 
coming back, to pay him for his trouble. I mention this 
trifling circumstance to aid in the delineation of Mr. Wesley's 
character, he was so jealous of his rights. 

July 3. Mr. Wesley begins to experience fresh trouble 



108 THE GKEAT IRON WHEEL. 

from the ladies. It is a widow this time, who testifies 
that Mr. Wesley addressed her repeatedly on the subject of 
matrimony, and she rejected him. I know not whether this 
was the same woman who set all the town in a blaze a short 
time before, so that none would attend on Mr. Wesley at the 
communion. In his Journal I find this entry : " Immediately 
after the holy communion, I mentioned to Mrs. Williamson 
(Mr. Causton's niece) something I thought reprovable in her 
behavior. At this she appeared extremely angry ; said she 
did not expect such usage from me, and at the turn of the 
street through which we were walking home, went abruptly 
away." 

August 7. Mr. Wesley repelled this Mrs. Williamson 
from the holy communion, and on Monday following the 
Eecorder of Savannah issued a warrant for Mr. Wesley, and 

on Tuesday he is taken by the Constable and carried before 

the Bailiff, and is held over to the next Court for trial. 
Mr. Causton warmly espouses the defence of his niece, 

and boldly alleges that Mr. Wesley's course towards Mrs. 

Williamson was "purely out of revenge, because he Mr. 

Wesley, had made proposals of marriage to her, which she 

had rejected, and married Mr. Williamson," and now Mr. 

Wesley sought to disgrace her to indulge his spite. Mr. 

Wesley does not deny addressing Mrs. Williamson. 

"Tuesday 16. Mrs. Williamson swore to and signed an 

affidavit, intimating much more than it asserted, but asserting 

that Mr. Wesley had many times proposed marriage to her ; 

all of which proposals she had rejected. Of this I desired a 

copy, Mr. Causton replied, { Sir, you may have one from any 

of the newspapers of America.' "* 

* This bill or indictment, I am informed by Judge Warren, of 
Albany, Ga., is still preserved in the Court House at Savannah, where 
it can be seen. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 109 

Mr. Wesley is tried by a grand jury of forty -four, upon an 
indictment of ten specifications, and the jury was charged to 
beware of spiritual tyranny, and to oppose the new illegal 
authority which ivas usurped over their consciences. Mr. 
Wesley was naturally tyrannical. The jury found a true 
bill against John, the founder of Methodism, for his conduct 
towards Mrs. Williamson, and nine other charges. Poor man, 
he was surrounded by difficulties— unconverted, unmarried, 
a woman prosecuting him for his conduct towards her, far 
from home, and his own people thoroughly disgusted with 
his conduct, and outraged by his arrogance and imperial 
dictation ! ! 

He is thinking of home, and the poor common people of 
England, who will bear his insults and lordings over them 
far better than these Georgians. Mr. Wesley concludes that 
he has mistaken the call to America, or answered for some 
one else. He writes October 7, " I consulted my friends, 
whether God did not call me to return to England." Poor 
fellow, God call you, to be sure ! His friends decided not 
that God called him, but " that he ought to go, but not yet." 
What does the great Wesley think of running away from 
America, and away from a court trial, for the ill treatment 
of a woman, and unwarrantable spiritual dictation, and a pub- 
lic nuisance % ! ! 

He writes in his journal of November 3, " I appeared 
again at the court, holden on that day, and again at the court 
held Tuesday, November 25, on which day Mr. Causton de- 
sired to speak with me. He then read me some affidavits 
which had been made, September 15, last past; in one of 
which it was affirmed that I then abused Mr. Causton in his 
own house, calling him liar, villain, and so on, (alas, how 
familiar, Mr. Soula, are these terms with your editors and 
preachers !) It was now likewise repeated before several 



110 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

persons, which indeed I had forgot, that I had been repri- 
manded AT THE LAST COURT for an ENEMY to, and HINDERER of 
the PUBLIC PEACE." 

" I again consulted with my friends, who agreed with me 
that the time we looked for was now come." .No wonder. 
But Mr. Wesley will stay and stand his trial, will he not — 
he will not run away like a guilty felon from these shores ? 
Hear him : 

"In the afternoon, (December 2, 1737,) the magistrates 
published an order, requiring all the officers and sentinels to 
prevent my going out of the province ; and forbidding any 
person to assist me to do so. Being now only a prisoner 
at large, in a place where I knew by experience^ every day 
would give fresh opportunity to procure evidence of words I 
never said, and actions I never did, (what a charge against 
your own brethren and Church !) I clearly saw the hour was 
come for leaving this place ; and as soon as evening prayers 
were over, about eight o'clock, the tide then serving, I shook 
off the dust of my feet, and left Georgia." Thus did Mr. 
Wesley shake off forever American dust from his feet, but 
he could not so easily rid himself of the unenviable character 
that he had earned for himself here in the short space of one 
year and nine months. 

It is not expected that Mr. Wesley would ever love Ame- 
rica after such a leave of it, and his future life and writings 
attest the fact that he never did. This was the first effort to 
plant Methodism on the soil of Georgia, and that by its 
founder — the great Wesley. Thus have I traced its history, 
until Methodism took ship and tide in the person of Wesley, 
on that ever memorable night, at eight o'clock, and sailed 
away for England, Thursday the 22d, on board of the ship 
Samuel, Captain Pearcy. See Wesley's Works, vol. iii., 
p. 45. 



LETTER X. 



Methodism not necessarily a Christian Society — May be com- 
posed of sinners alone, preachers and members, as at first — 
Capt. Foy< the inventor of Class Meetings, Class Leaders 
and Stewards — -A Catechetical Review of the facts of this 
letter. 

Sir : — Having noticed in my last Letter. Methodism as it 
was, in its conception and birth, I am prepared to mark, step 
by step, its growth and development into " Methodism as it 
is." Change, is written upon every page of its history — it 
is a system of change, void of every feature of stability or 
permanency. This, of itself forfeits all its claims to the 
title of a Church of Christ, since his Church was to remain 
unchanged through all the mutations of time ; and. then, no 
one but Christ has any right to change the institutions of 
his Church. It would be impious in angels or men to pre- 
sume to add to or subtract from, or change in the least re- 
spect, the laws or organization of the Church of the living 
God. Angels would start back in horror at the thought of 
such daring ! But Methodism, devised by Mr. Wesley, was 
changed and modified by him, from time to time, during 
his whole life, to suit his taste, and since it belonged to him 
as a Society of his own creating, he had a right to modify it 

(ill) 



112 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

"ad libitum" aiid "ad infinitum." I find no fault with him 
for this, or for any thing he did, or to his Methodism, as he 
conducted it at the beginning, for he did not claim that it 
was a Church — he never presumed to call it a Christian 
Church, or advised others to do so. But its present arro- 
gant claims to divine origin, and to be recognized and com- 
muned with as the Church of Christ, set up for it by the suc- 
cessors of Wesley — and Methodism as it is, and as made by 
them, I do most utterly and heartily repudiate, as an ud- 
scriptural, anti-reasonable and anti-American power, a cleri- 
cal despotism of the direst type, dangerous to religion, and 
to the religious liberty of this land. 

To sustain my first position, Inskip in his history of Me- 
thodism, says, p. 37, 38, " In the beginning, Mr. Wesley did 
not conceive the idea of forming a Society at all. (Much less, 
then, a distinct Church, or any part of it.) "Afterwards, 
however, he consummated such an organization as he found 
to be suitable and necessary." Here it is frankly admitted 
that, 1. Mr. Wesley had no idea at first of forming a So- 
ciety ; 2. That he did, at length, organize one himself with- 
out consulting any one — it was his own work ! 3. That he 
did not consult the Scriptures for a plan, or conform his or- 
ganization to its teachings, but fixed up his system to suit 
his own notions, and as he thought to be suitable ! Why, 
sir, if he thus coolly and deliberately had gone to work with 
the design of founding a Christian Church, he would be 
justly entitled to the title of Antichrist/ Thus setting up 
his authority and kingdom in open opposition and hostility 
to that of Jesus Christ, who is the only Lawgiver in Zion, 
and is Head over all things to his Church. Though Wesley 
did not do it, and I will do him the justice to say, had no 
thought of it ; yet have not his successors done it ? Have 
not they set up Methodism, and called it the Church of 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 113 

Christ ; and is it not this day urged forward by its rulers as 
a rival of. Christ's true Church, though originated, as we 
have seen, with an unconverted man, been modified by men, 
and governed by human laws, subject to perpetual change 
to suit the whims of men until now 1 And as a rival Church, 
is it not hostile to the progress, and even the existence of 
Christ's Church in the world ? Does it not subvert the con- 
stitution, laws, government, membership, and ordinances 
and design of the Church of the New Testament ? Let can- 
did men think 1 Let Christians who love our Lord Jesus 
Christ consider the questions well ! 

But to proceed with my proof: "But this organization 
was not a distinct sect, holding a particular formal creed, or 
prescribing any exclusive method and ceremonies of worship. 
It was a Society in the Church'" (of England.) 

And when it left the Church of England, it was a Society 
in the world, and can be nothing more or less, so long as it 
remains Methodism. 

" Hence those connected with the ''Societies' were earnestly 
and repeatedly w T arned of the evil of separating from the 
Church" (of England.) "They were also urged to attend 
the ordinances, and receive the sacraments, as administered 
by the Church" (of England.) "And this course was con- 
tinued a number of years, at least as long as it was deemed 
expedient and proper. However, as providential indications 
were given, and the wants of any particular time or place, 
were clearly developed, Methodism modified its instrumen- 
talities, and changed its position." It thus vindicates its right 
to change, and its claim to the title of a " religious proteus." 
Let me trace its changing progress. 

Its first rise was in 1729, at Oxford — it appeared in 1736 
in Savannah, Ga. — and its first appearance in London was in 
1738, May 1st, on which day a Society of forty or fifty was 



114 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

organized in London. Mr. Wesley travelled from place to 
place, and organized his Societies. He supplied these Soci- 
eties with preachers from those who joined with him, and 
those he appointed as exhorters and preachers from among 
the most zealous and intelligent of his members. 

In this year Wesley leased the Foundry and fitted it up 
for preaching, and here, for the first time, we find Methodism 
with a temple ; and, strange as it sounds, from 1729 to 1735, 
it was without an altar ! and the object of its worship, the 
Greek and Latin classics ! 

If we look into the Foundry in 1 738, we will find a Metho- 
dist Society, and John Wesley its founder and master, with- 
out laws or officers, save its head — simply a religious meet- 
ing of all who wished to save their souls or hear Mr. Wesley 
preach. 

As a Society, it had as yet but one element of organization 
— but one bond of union, and that was the condition of 
admission. It could not be regarded so much as a Christian 
or religious Society, in the sense that Christians alone, or 
religious persons, were embraced in it, or admitted to its 
privileges, but as a Society of individuals, having a religious 
end in view, i. e., to save their souls. I would call attention 
here to the fact that Methodism was not and is not strictly 
a religious or Christian Society, since it did not, and still 
does not require a prof ession of religion as a condition of mem- 
bership! ! It may consist of unconverted persons alone, 
preachers and members, as it did in the beginning, from 
1729 to May 24th, 1738, twenty-three days after he organized ! 
his first Society in London ! and nearly ten years after the 
first rise of Methodism ! 7 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 115 

Condition of Admission into a Methodist Society, A.D. 
1734-1784. 

Inskip quotes Wesley's own words. 

" One circumstance more is quite peculiar to the people 
called Methodists ; that is, the terms upon which any person 
may be admitted into their society, (not the Church of 
Christ !) They do not impose, in order to their admission, 
any opinions whatever / Let them be Churchmen or Dissen- 
ters, Presbyterians or Independents, it is no obstacle/ The 
Presbyterian may be a Presbyterian still ; the Independent 
or Anabaptist use his own mode of worship ; so may the 
Quaker {?) and none will contend with him about it. They 
think and let think. One condition, and one only, is required : 
a real desire to save their souls. Where this is, it is enough, 
they desire no more, they lay stress upon nothing else ! " 
— Inskip, p. 35. Unconverted men, then, sceptics, univer- 
salists, and infidels, if they wish their souls to be saved, were 
as properly entitled to membership in ancient Methodism, 
as was Mr. Wesley himself. By referring to the Discipline 
of Methodism South, page 23, you will find that a profession 
of religion is not a condition of membership in a Methodist 
Society to-day/ "There is but one condition previously 
required of those who desire admission into these societies, 
' a desire to flee from the wrath to come, and to be saved 
from their sins.' " Is this the only condition of membership 
in the Church of Christ — was it the only condition of admis- 
sion into the Churches of the New Testament % 

Up to this period we find Methodism without a bishop, 
eldership, or itinerancy, class meetings, leaders, or stewards, 
or even baptism and the Lord's supper. 



116 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

The Origin of Classes and Class Meetings — of Class 
Leaders and Stewards. 

I will allow Mr. Wesley himself to inform us how class 
meetings and class leaders originated. " But- when a large 
number of people were joined together, the great difficulty 
was to keep them together. For they were continually 
scattering hither and thither, and we knew no way to help 
it. But God 'provided for this also, when we thought not of 
it." A year or two after, Mr. Wesley met the chief of the 
society in Bristol, and inquired, " How shall we pay the debt 
upon the preaching-house'?" Captain Foy stood up and 
said, " Let every one in the society give a penny a week, 
and it will easily be done." " But many of them," said one, 
"have not a penny to give." "True," said the Captain; 
"then put ten or twelve of them to me. Let each of these 
give what they can weekly, and I will supply what is want- 
ing. Many others made the same offer, so Mr. Wesley 
divided the societies among them, assigning a class of about 
twelve persons to each of these, who were termed leaders P 
— Wesley's Works, vol. vii., p. 816. 

From the above, it will be seen, l.'That the class and the 
class leader was the invention of Captain Foy, and not con- 
ceived of by Wesley at all, only adopted by him. Think of it. 
The class meeting law is considered one of the essential fea- 
tures of Methodism, " a vital doctrine" with the rulers of it. 
Since they will exclude every member, however pious he 
may be, if he refuses to obey a law that was not of Mr. 
Wesley's devising, but suggested to him by Captain Foy, 
of his Majesty's marines, we suppose! An English captain 
of the marines invented the class meeting ! which American 
Christians must now obev, or be excluded ! ! 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 117 

2. That both the class and the class leader were devised 
and instituted purely for a secular end, the collection of money 
from the society. The Methodist class leader is then the 
chief publican or tax collector of Methodism, and successor 
to Captain Foy ! Yet, for refusing to attend the class meet- 
ings, which were, and still are, the pay days of Methodists — 
a meeting originating in the mind of a marine captain, for 
the purpose of paying taxes, the Discipline of modern 
Methodism directs that the member be excluded from the 
Methodist Society, although guilty of no immorality — of no 
offence towards God or man ! 

Another duty was enjoined upon these leaders, which 
duty was accidentally suggested to Mr. Wesley : "Not long 
after, (the appointment of leaders,) one of these informed 
Mr. Wesley that, calling on such a one in his house, he 
found him quarrelling with his wife — another was found in 
drink. It immediately struck into Mr. Wesley's mind, 
" This is the very thing we wanted ; the leaders are the per- 
sons who may not only receive the contributions, but also 
watch over the souls of their brethren. The society in Lon- 
don being informed of this, willingly followed the example 
of that in Bristol, as did every society from that time, whe- 
ther in Europe or America." — Vol. vh\, p. 318. 

The class leaders, then, were designed to be the tax- 
gatherers and spies, or informers, of the class appointed to 
them. 

There is one more officer so nearly allied to the leader, 
that I will notice his origin here, i. e. the steward. 

" In a few days some of them said, ■ Sir, we will not sit 
under your preaching for nothing, we will subscribe quar- 
terly.' I said, ' I will have nothing, for I want nothing. My 
fellowship supplies me with all I want/ One of them re- 
plied, ' Nay, but you want £115 to pay for the lease of the 



118 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

Foundry, and likewise a large sum of money to put it into 
repair.' On this consideration, I suffered them to subscribe ; 
and when the society met, I asl^ed, ' Who will take the 
trouble of receiving this money and paying it where it is 
needful % ' One said, ' I will do it, and keep the account for 
you.' So here was the first steward. Afterward I desired 
one or two more to help me, as stewards, and in process of 
time, a greater number." — Wesley's Works, vol. v. p. 220. 

Stewards, then, are the receivers and disbursers of the 
money collected by the publicans. 

Let us review the features of Methodism developed be- 
tween A. D. 1729-1738 ; and as you teach your people by 
questions and answers, it may be more agreeable to your- 
self to glance over the history in this form. 

Q. In what year did Methodism first appear % 

A. November 26, A. D. 1729.— Wesley's Works, vol. 
vii., p. 348. 

Q. By whom was it originated — is it of heaven or of men ? 

A. Of men, as Methodists themselves boast that English 
Methodism was founded by John and Charles Wesley, and 
two others, at Oxford, A. D. 1729. 

Q. What was the original design of Methodism, religious 
or literary ? 

A. Purely literary, as the first Methodists devoted the 
evenings of the week to the reading of the Greek and Roman I 
classics. Methodism had no altar for many years, and its 
worship was the classics. — See Wesley's Works, vol. iii., p. 6. 

Q. Were the originators of the scheme of Methodism 
converted men % 

A. Not one of them, as can be discovered. Charles 
Wesley did not profess a personal knowledge of religion 
until Wednesday, May 3d, 1738, and John not until Wed- 
nesday, May 24. 1738. 



Hi 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 119 

Q. May it not be justly said that Methodism came up out 
of the earth ? 

A. I think so, and many reflecting men are beginning to 
think so, it being purely of an earthly origin, and in this re- 
spect answering to a typz of power to arise and take the 
place of the second beast, or Roman Catholic Church.— Rev. 
xiii., 11. 

Q. With whom originated the class meetings and class 
leaders, and stewards, of Methodism, and for what purpose ? 

A. With a certain Captain Foy, in the year 1738, for the 
purpose of collecting money from the people. The society 
was divided into classes of twelve persons, and a collector, 
called a class leader, was set over them to receive their 
weekly contributions ; for this purpose they met weekly, 
in classes of twelve, and were called class meetings. A person 
offered to receive the money so collected, and pay it over, 
and Mr. Wesley accepted him, and called him a steward, and 
then appointed others in his society. 

Q. What other duties did Mr. Wesley enjoin upon these 
leaders or tax collectors ; and how did the duty occur to 
him? 

A. He afterwards appointed each of them to be spies 
and informants upon their several classes, and to report what 
they saw or heard, to the preacher in charge ; and this idea 
was given to Mr. Wesley from one of these leaders volun- 
tarily informing upon his brethren ! 

Q. What characters in the Church of Rome do the class 
leaders put you in mind of? 

A. The inquisitors, whose duty it is to inform upon their 
brethren to the general of their order. 

Q. What meetings are held by these leaders and stewards, 
and for what purpose % 

A. Weekly, with the minister in charge, the leaders to 



120 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

pay over the money to the stewards, and to report all offen- 
ders to the minister. 

Q. Did Mr. Wesley ever maintain that these officers, 
meetings or regulations, were scriptural, or suggested to him 
by the Scriptures 1 

A. Never. He never professed to have consulted the 
Scriptures for his institute or his regulations. The Society 
gathered to hear him preach. Capt. Foy suggested the class 
meetings and class leadership to him, by offering himself to 
be one — another person offered to be steward — and a class 
leader became an informant ; and so was suggested to Mr. 
Wesley both these officers and their duties, and the class 
meetings. 

' Q. Is not the class meeting considered an essential and 
vital part of the system of Methodism 1 

A. Yes. " Class meetings are an essential part of our 
system." * * "It is not claimed that they are of divine 
origin." — Inskip, p. 192. 

Q. But does not the discipline require that all those who 
refuse to attend class shall be excluded, even if devotedly 
pious persons ? 

A. Yes. See discipline, section 3, Ans. 2. 

Q. Is not this, then, a palpable violation of the commis- 
sion, if Methodists claim their Society to be a Church of Christ, 
since they teach the observance of what they themselves 
admit Christ never commanded, and exclude his followers 
for not obeying the laws and traditions of men, as the class 
meeting, which he has positively forbidden them to do % 

A. I think so. If Bishop Soule, and his brethren And- 
rews, Capers and Paine, whose names subscribe and enjoin 
the observance of the discipline, claim that Methodism is the 
or a Church of Christ, then is it unscriptural in its practice, 
and they themselves openly and palpably violate the express 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 121 

command of Christ in the commission, by teaching for ob- 
servance what Christ has not commanded ; and Methodism 
is a form of Antichrist, opposing as it does Christ's autho- 
rity. 

6 



LETTER II 



"METHODISM AS IT IS." 

INTRODUCTION. 

Dear Sir : — Having briefly sketched " Methodism as it 
was," — Wesleyan Methodism originated and designed to be 
by its author, Mr. John Wesley, I now wish to call your at- 
tention to " Methodism as it is," or to American Methodism, 
as it now exists among us here. This letter is designed only 
as an introduction to this subject. 

I have satisfactorily shown you, and every other candid man, 
that the scheme of Methodism originated, not with God, but 
with Mr. Wesley and his coadjutors, and that, too, ten years 
before he was a converted man, himself confessing it ! A 
Church scheme devised by good men would be bad enough 
— but one originating with an unregenerate, a wicked man, as 
was Wesley, from 1729, the date of the birth of his system 
until May 24, 1736, is far too earth-born for the tastes of 
reflecting men. 

I have also shown, most conclusively, that Mr. Wesley 
never, for one moment, claimed that he was originating a 
Church, in any sense, nor until the day of his death did he 
claim — as, sir, I fear you do — that Methodism was a Church 
of Jesus Christ. It was, in any given place, only a Society 

(122) 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 123 

in the Church of England, the object of which was the pro- 
motion of personal piety ; and it was open to all who sought, 
both as Christians, to cultivate the graces of the spirit, or as 
sinners to seek the salvation of their souls. 

Only one condition was required in the lifetime of Wesley, 
a desire to "flee the wrath to come." No Church-rite or 
ordinance, as baptism, or the Lord's Supper, or ministerial 
ordination, was administered — it was only a religious Socie- 
ty, we repeat, designed to promote the attainment and cul- 
tivation of religion, prayer and exhortation — as a simple 
prayer-meeting of any Church ; hence Episcopalians, Pres- 
byterians, Congregationalists, Lutherans, or Baptists, could 
belong to Methodist Societies, as they now can to a Bible 
Society, and still be Presbyterians and Baptists. Mr. Wes- 
ley nor his cotemporaries would have been offended with me 
had I called his Societies by the name he gave them, Socie- 
ties, as your brethren now are, but he would have been highly 
incensed should I have called them churches, or Methodism 
a Church or the Church ! What a change has taken place in 
a few short years — not in Methodism, to make it a Church — 
but in the demands of Methodists upon the charity of Chris- 
tians ! 

Methodist Societies in America continued as appendages 
to the Church of England until the Baltimore Conference of 
1784. They claimed only to be Societies, not churches or a 
Church ; they did not presume to ordain ministers, to bap- 
tize, or to administer the Lord's Supper ; the ordinances of 
the Church were not known among them, more than among 
the various Bible and Auxiliary Bible Societies of the land. 
If my statement is denied, I refer to your own historical doc- 
uments. See Inskip, p. 43 : 

" The first regular Conference was held in Philadelphia, 
June, 1773. At this Conference, the authority of Mr. Wes- 



I'M THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

ley, and the doctrine and discipline of the Methodists, were 
formally recognized and adopted. They also agreed unan- 
imously not to administer the Sacrament, and all the mem- 
bers were exhorted to attend the Church (of England) and to 
receive the ordinances tl^ere. Methodism then served only as 
a great drag-net, with which to gather in the Church of Eng- 
land ! 

The close of the revolution marked the passing of Me- 
thodism from this, its chrysalis state, as it proved to be. 
Methodism is now, not to be transformed, but to claim a 
new name and position — its 12,000 Societies are to be made 
into one Church. 

Now, sir, mark the cause of my astonishment, at the fa- 
cility with which it is accomplished, the ease with which a 
purely human invention — a Society set on foot by a man, 
not professing the slightest conformity to the direction of the 
Word of God — is made as by a magic word, " the Church 
of God, the pillar and ground of the truth." 

Was the organism of Methodism disturbed ? Not in the 
least. Were the laws and enactments, the polity of Mr. 
Wesley, laid aside, and the teachings of Christ substituted 
in their place 1 Was the authority of Mr. Wesley, as head 
of the Church and of the ministry, repudiated for the autho- 
rity of Christ, who is Head over all things to his Church, 
and the only master of his ministers ? Were all those who 
made no profession of religion — the hosts of the ungodly 
and wicked, that had been gathered into those Societies, for- 
mally excluded from the visible bounds of the new Church ] 
By no means — not one of these changes — all things were 
allowed to remain as they were from the beginning of Me- 
thodism. It was only " resolved" by sixty Methodist Circuit 
riders, not an individual member was consulted in the mat- 
ter, or had a voice in so momentous a proceeding — it was 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 125 

the work of ambitious Episcopal deacons and priests, who 
wished to be Episcopal Bishops, Right Rev. Fathers in God, 
and Ruling Elders ; I say it was determined by them to set 
up for themselves, as Church dignitaries and Church rulers, 
and therefore it was simply resolved, that the Societies in 
America " become a Church, under the name of the Method- 
ist E. Church." See History of Discipline. 

They commanded, and Methodism stood fast and forth a 
Church of Christ, with Messrs. Coke and Asbury as its visi- 
ble head, clothed in almost pontifical power ! ! By this sim- 
ple process — by the passage of a simple resolution did Wes- 
leyan Methodism become Coke and Asburian Methodism, 
or, as claimed by you, sir, and your cotemporary bishops, 
the Church of Jesus Christ, which the prophets foretold was 
to be " cut out without hands," to be set up by the God of 
heaven, and which Christ himself declared was to be built 
by himself, and to continue indestructible and unchanged, 
from his ascension to his second advent. 

Bishop Soule, I earnestly and most respectfully appeal to 
you, sir, — must I believe that human Societies can be thus 
easily transmuted by a simple vote — by sixty men saying 
"Aye" — into veritable Churches of Christ, with a right at once 
to demand fellowship of me and of the Churches of Christ, 
and that recognition, association, and intercourse, due to ve- 
ritable Churches of Christ 1 

It seems to me, sir, seriously and before my God, that 
your claims upon me and my denomination are preposter- 
ous, and, in the sight of heaven, almost impious. If I sin in 
viewing your claims thus, I call upon you, as you love my 
soul, to make one effort, at least, to enlighten and convert 
me from the error of my ways. Are you not morally 
bound to do so ? 

Let us see how this precedent will work when applied to 



126 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

other human societies. Suppose at the next Annual Cele- 
bration of the Order of Free and Accepted Masons in the 
United States, this resolution should be proposed : 

" Whereas, since it is deemed by us expedient, on account 
of the age of our order, and to secure its recognition and 
fellowship by all Christian churches, therefore, 

Resolved, That, from henceforth, we will be known and 
recognized as the Masonic Episcopal Church of the United 
States ; and our Grand High Priests be called, and exercise 
the functions of, Episcopal Bishops, and the next highest 
officers exercise the office of Presiding Elders." 

Very well. Now let the Odd Fellows do the same, and 
we have the Odd Fellowship Church. Suppose now, that 
they resolve to initiate their members by a sprinkling, or 
pouring, or an immersing ceremony, in which the candidate 
professes to recognize Jesus Christ as the Son of God — and, 
also, at stated times, a supper of bread and wine is observed 
after the manner of the Lord's Supper, would your Christian 
charity allow you to recognize them as true Churches of 
Christ ? Would you fellowship and recognize them as 
Christian Churches by inviting their preachers or chaplains 
into your pulpits? Would you not look upon their act as 
impious 1 Would you eat the Lord's Supper with them in 
token of fellowship 1 Would you receive their members as 
baptized? Could the world or those societies justly de- 
nounce you and your brethren as illiberal or uncharitable 
should you refuse to recognize their claims as Churches of 
Christ ? There might be many good men in them, and their 
High Priests or chaplains might be even ministers, but 
would this entitle them to be regarded as Christian Churches. 
Now, sir, the Methodist E. Church stands forth in this light 
before the world — humam societies, retaining their man-con- 
trived organizations, laws and traditions, terms of admission, 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 127 

and unregenerated membership, voting themselves the 
Church of Christ, and demanding recognition and fellowship 
of all Churches ! What is such a society, but a great rival 
and antagonistic institution to the Church set up by the God 
of Heaven. 

You can understand why I cannot, and why Baptists can 
neither fellowship }~ou at the Supper, or receive those 
initiated into your societies by the application of water by 
any mode, or invite your preachers into our pulpits, thereby 
endorsing your claims before the world. If any Baptists are 
guilty of any one of the above acts, they are manifestly 
inconsistent, and do it doubtless through false charity , a spe- 
cious liberality, or pure inconsiderateness. 



LETTER III. 



Methodism began in America by a woman — Mr. Wesley falsely 
charged with forming an Episcopal Church, and ordaining 
Coke a Bishop — Methodist Episcopacy originated by fraud 
and forgery — Methodists know not whether Bishops are 
Bishops or Elders — divided among themselves. 

Sir : — It is a fact worthy of notice that Methodism took 
its successful start in the United States through a woman, an 
aged Methodist woman, who came over to New York in 
1766— her name is lost — in a former company that came 
over in 1765, were a few who had been once Methodists in 
England, among whom was one local preacher ; but they had 
all fallen from grace before the old lady's arrival, and Embry 
was lashed into his duty by her severe reproofs. Thus we 
see the precious seed deposited already in America through 
the direct influence of woman. See Gorrie, p. 39. 

In noticing " Methodism as it is," I begin with the organi- 
zation of the Methodist E. Church. The Episcopal part of 
the concern was not the conception or design of Wesley 
— he utterly abhorred Episcopacy — but of Messrs. Coke and 
Asbury, his American superintendents. We have no right 
to believe that it is such a Church as he wished or expected 

(128) 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 129 

Methodists to organize in this country. Though Mr. "Wesley 
never intended to start a new sect, or to his dying day, 
wished his followers m England to separate from the Church, 
yet, America having achieved her independence, and union 
of Church and State for ever abolished here — and many of 
his preachers had forsaken their Churches — Mr. Wesley gave 
his consent for American Methodists to form, at a proper 
time, a separate Church, but when they did so, not to form 
an Episcopal Church, and create prelatical bishops — but in his 
own words in patterning it, to " follow after (or organize it 
according to the teachings of) Scripture, and the Primitive 
Church." Neither of which did Mr. Wesley believe taught 
Episcopacy. He says, "But that it (Episcopacy) is pre- 
scribed in Scripture, I do not believe." But as the Societies 
still wished to be under " his care" while he lived, he so- 
lemnly set apart Dr. Coke as his assistant, to superintend 
the affairs of the Societies in America. 

Eor the sake of my readers, I will copy his letter to the 
brethren, informing them what he had done, and I hope they 
will compare it carefully with what you said he did do, in 
the first section of the Discipline : 

" Bristol, September 10, 1784. 

"To Dr. Coke, Mr. Asbury and our brethren in North 
America. 

"By a very uncommon train of providences, many of the 
provinces of North America are totally disjoined from the 
mother country, and elected into independent states. The 
English government has no authority over them, either civil 
or ecclesiastical, any more than over the States of Holland. 
A civil authority is exercised over them, partly by the Con- 
gress, partly by the provincial assemblies. But no one either 
exercises or claims any ecclesiastical authority at all. In 
6* 



130 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

this peculiar situation some thousands of the inhabitants of 
these States desire my advice, and in compliance with their 
desire I have drawn up a little sketch. Lord King's account 
of the Primitive Church convinced me, many years ago, that 
bishops and presbyters are the same order, and consequently 
have the same right to ordain. For many years I have been 
importuned, from time to time, to exercise the right, by 
ordaining part of our travelling preachers. But I have still 
refused, not only for peace sake, but because I was deter- 
mined, as little as possible, to violate the established order 
of the National Church, to which I belonged. 

" But the case is widely different between England and 
North America. Here there are bishops who have a legal 
jurisdiction. In America there are none, neither any parish 
minister. So that for some hundreds of miles together, 
there is none either to baptize or to administer the Lord's 
Supper. Here, therefore, my scruples are at an end ; and I 
conceive myself at full liberty, as I violate no order, and 
invade no man's right, by appointing and sending laborers 
into the harvest. 

" I have accordingly appointed Dr. Coke and Mr. Francis 
Asbury, to be joint superintendents over our brethren in 
North America; as also Richard Whatcoat and Thomas 
Vasey, to act as elders among them, by baptizing, and ad- 
ministering the Lord's Supper. And I have prepared a 
liturgy, little differing from that of the Church of England, 
(I think the best constituted National Church in the world,) 
which I advise all the travelling preachers to use on the 
Lord's Day, in all the congregations, reading the Litany 
only on Wednesdays and Fridays, and praying extempore 
on all other days. I also advise the elders to administer the 
Supper of the Lord on every Lord's Day. 

"Jf any one will point out a more rational and Scriptural 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 131 

way of feeding and guiding these poor sheep in the wilder- 
ness, I will gladly embrace it. At present, I cannot see any 
better method than that I have taken. 

"It has indeed been proposed to desire the English 
bishops to ordain part of our preachers for America. But 
to this I object, 1. I desired the Bishop of London to ordain 
one, but could not prevail. 2. If they consented, we know 
the slowness of their proceedings ; but the matter admits of 
no delay. 3. If they were to ordain them now, they would 
expect to govern them. And how grievously would this 
entangle us! 4. As our American brethren are now totally 
disentangled, both from the State and the English hierarchy, 
we dare not entangle them again, either with the one or the 
other. They are now at full liberty, simply to follow the 
Scriptures and the primitive church. And we judge it best 
that they should stand fast in that liberty wherewith God 
has so strangely made them free. 

"John Wesley." 

You certainly cannot affirm, in the face of Mr. Wesley's 
assertion in this letter, that he believed in Episcopacy, 
though he did think the Church of England the best National 
Church in the world — and I am free to admit it, and yet I 
believe a National or Episcopal Church both unscriptural 
and unapostolical. Mr. Wesley distinctly repudiates the 
third order, and says he was convinced years ago that 
" bishops and presbyters are the same order" Is not this 
enough ? Do you say that he ordained Mr. Coke a bishop, 
when he believed him as much a bishop as himself, before 
he laid hands on him % ! But suppose I show that Mr. 
Wesley looked upon those ministers who received the title, 
and exercised the powers of the third order, or prelatical 
bishops, in the light of " heathenish priests and mitred infi- 



132 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

dels," will it not be convincing ? Hear him : " For these 
forty years I have been in doubt concerning that question, 
' What obedience is due to heathenish priests and mitred 
infidels.' " * * " Some obedience I always paid to 
bishops in obedience to the laws of the land, but I cannot see 
that I am under any obligations to obey them farther than 
those laws require." * * "I submit still to mitred 
infidels." * * 

Now, I have as good grounds to pronounce you, sir, and 
your three fellow-bishops, " heathenish priests and mitred 
infidels" as Mr. Wesley had to apply such epithets to the 
bishops of the Episcopal Church ; indeed, if they deserved 
the titles so do you, and all Bishops of Methodism — but, sir, 
should I presume to use such language in addressing you, or 
speaking of you, what an outcry would be heard throughout 
your Societies in the whole length and breadth of the land. 
Every circuit rider would take this letter for his text at his 
next appointment. 

Must I believe you when you declare in the Discipline 
that Mr. Wesley did ordain Dr. Coke an Episcopal bishop, 
and authorized him to ordain Asbury one ? 

Can you say it in the face of the above % Can you say it 
in the face of his objugatory letter to Asbury % (see Letter, 
No. VIII.,) in which he says, " How can you, how dare you 
suffer yourself to be called a bishop % I shudder, I start, 
at the very thought ! Men may call me a knave or a fool ; 
a rascal, a scoundrel, and I am content, but they shall 
never, with my consent, call me a BISHOP ;" and do you 
say Dr. Coke and Mr. Asbury were bishops ? Can a servant 
be greater than his lord? Hear his obsecration to you, 
Bishop Soule, and to your fellows, whom Mr. Wesley would 
regard as mitred infidels : " For my sake, for God's sake, 
for CHRIST'S sake, put a full end to this !" Will you 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 133 

listen to his prayer ? How could his anguished spirit rest, 
were he permitted to see " heathenish priests and mitred 
infidels," ruling and directing the interests of his Societies in 
America 1 

Am. J, with all the lights before my eyes, to believe your 
declarations in the first section of the Discipline, (1.) That 
Mr. Wesley did prefer the Episcopacy for his Societies in 
America (?) (2.) That he did actually ordain Dr. Coke a 
bishop (?) (3.) That he did deliver to him letters of Epis- 
copal orders (?) and (4.) Authorized him to ordain F. 
Asbury an Episcopal bishop (?) (5.) And that, at " that 
time" the Conference held at Baltimore, did unanimously 
receive them as its bishops (?) (6.) And that they were 
satisfied with their ordinations as Episcopal bishops (?!!!!!) 

Why, sir, it would require the faith of a Catholic, who is 
to believe the Pope, though his teachings flatly contradict the 
plain declarations of Scripture — he must believe both the 
Scriptures and the Pope. Must I believe both the facts of 
history and the bishops 1 

How can you reconcile your statement in the Discipline 
with the statements and published writings of Mr. Wesley ? 
I challenge you, or all the learned doctors of your Society to 
do it! Will you still say Mr. Wesley did ordain Dr. 
Coke an Episcopal bishop — a minister of the third 
order ? Reconcile it with the following facts. 

1. You will make Mr. Wesley guilty of creating and 
ordaining to an order he expressly declares in his works and 
notes does not exist in the Primitive Churches. 

2. But on the supposition that Episcopacy is scriptural, 
you make him guilty of the profanation of the ordinance — he, 
a simple presbyter, assay to ordain Coke, who was his equal, 
a bishop — violating the law of Episcopal ordination, and 
consequently giving to Methodists a spurious Episcopacy. 



134 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

3. But you make Mr. Wesley guilty of ordaining and 
placing over his brethren in America, heathenish priests and 
mitred infidels, as he called the unscriptural order and office 
of Episcopal bishops, and to require his brethren and 
ministers here to obey such ! 

But, sir, the plain facts of your histories are against you. 

4. Mr. Wesley does not say, as you affirm, that he or- 
dained Coke a bishop of the third order, or " to the episco- 
pal office" — but simply a superintendent under him over the 
Societies in America — he, Wesley, being the father of all. 

5. Nor does he say so in his letter of appointment. 

If positive, unequivocal proof is wanted, even from Wes- 
ley himself, that in setting apart Dr. Coke, he had not the 
most distant thought of org-anizing a new Church, but only 
to provide them with ministers, to administer ordinances, 
while the Societies continued, under his care, and the members 
continued their connection with the Church of England — here 
it is in just so many words, and whoever denies it, impeaches 
the veracity and honesty of Mr. Wesley. Here are ' ■ the letters 
of episcopal orders," which you say Mr. Wesley gave to 
Dr. Coke, which any one can see is only a letter of recom- 
mendation ! 

" To all whom these presents shall come, John Wesley, 
late Fellow of Lincoln College, in Oxford, Presbyter of the 
Church of England, sendeth greeting : 

" Whereas many of the people in the southern provinces 
of North America, who desire to continue under my care, 
and still adhere to the doctrine and discipline of the Church 
of England, are greatly distressed for want of ministers to 
administer the sacraments of baptism and the Lord's Supper, 
according to the usage of the same church ; and whereas 
there does not appear to be any other way of supplying 
them with ministers: 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 135 

" Know all men, that I, John Wesley, think myself to be 
providentially called at this time to set apart some persons 
for the work of the ministry in America. And, therefore, 
under the protection of Almighty God, and with a single eye 
to his glory, I have this day set apart as a superintendent, by 
the imposition of my hands, and prayer, (being assisted by 
other ordained ministers,) Thomas Coke, doctor of civil 
law, a presbyter of the Church of England, and a man whom 
I judge to life well qualified for that great work. And I do 
hereby recommend him to all whom it may concern, as a fit 
person to preside over the flock of Christ. In testimony 
whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal, this second 
day of September, in the year of our Lord, one thousand 
seven hundred and eighty-four. 

" John Wesley." 

Can language be more explicit ? Mr. Wesley says, be- 
cause many of the people desire to be under his care, and 
still adhere to the doctrine and discipline of the Church of 
England, and have the sacraments administered according to 
the usage of the same Church, and there did not appear to 
Mr. Wesley any better way to gratify them but by supply- 
ing them with ministers; he accordingly recommends Dr. 
Coke to them, having solemnly set him apart, as we are wont 
to our departing missionaries to foreign lands, by solemn 
prayer, &c. Erom this slight circumstance, you declared 
that Mr. Wesley ordained Dr. Coke a bishop of the third 
order, and also constituted a new Church, the Methodist 
Episcopal Church. 

6. He certainly does not give either them or the world to 
understand that he ordained Coke, or authorized him to or- 
dain Asbury an episcopal bishop, in his objugatory letter to 
Asbury, (look back and read his letter in Letter VII.) " How 



136 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. 

can you, how dare you, suffer yourself to be called a 
Bishop." 

7. But they did not dare to assume the arrogant title un- 
til four years after Wesley set them apart or authorized 
them ! 

8. The Conference did not receive them as bishops — the 
title was a forgery, surreptitiously foisted into the minutes ! 

9. When they returned to England they were not received 
or acknowledged as bishops by Mr. Wesley, or ally one else. 

10. And, finally, Dr. Coke knew that Wesley did not or- 
dain him a bishop — he was never satisfied that he had Epis- 
copal ordination ! Why did he write to Bishop Seabury, 
and beg him to ordain himself and Asbury bishops, and to 
White and Seabury to ordain their preachers over again ! 
Why, Bishop Soule % In the name and for the honor of the 
Episcopacy of Methodism break your silence, and answer, 
if you can answer, why ? 

Ah ! sir, the wickedness of his assumption — his daring 
before heaven and in the sight of the world, preyed upon 
his conscience, and well nigh drove him mad ! Does he not, 
more than. once, in his letter to Bishop White, confess that 
Wesley never made him a bishop ? Does he not confess 
that he went farther in what he did in America, than 
Wesley intended ? Did he not even offer to return to the 
Protestant E. Church 1 Did he not beg Mr. White to keep 
his letter a secret, and bum it if the Bishop would not grant 
his request ?* And finally, as a last desperate effort, to be 
a real, and not a sham, Bishop, did he not apply to Wilber- 
force, member of Parliament, and to Lord Liverpool, in 
1813, to have him made Bishop of the English Episcopal 



* See Coke's letter to White, in White's Memoirs of the P. E. Church, 
1st ed. pp. 424-9. 



REPUBLICANISM backwards. 137 

Church in India? ! And yet you endorse and publish to the 
world the first section of the discipline, with these facts be- 
fore you ! I will not pronounce upon the morality of your 
statement, but, sir, I would rather lose a right arm, or a 
right eye, than to subscribe my name to such a declaration, 
with the lights now before me ! ! Will bishops set such a 
pattern for their subordinates 1 Does it require statements 
at such war with all historical facts, to support Methodist 
Episcopacy, and palm it off upon the credulity of the world ? 
But to return to the dilemma. You cannot say, as some of 
your modern writers are beginning to say, in order to escape 
the difficulty in which they find themselves involved, that 
Wesley did not ordain Coke a " bona fide'''' Bishop of the third 
order — but a Bishop) in office ? This will also involve you in 
a maze of difficulties. 

1. You affirm five times in your discipline that he ordained 
him an Episcopal Bishop ! 

2. That they were received as such by the Conference. 

3. That they were fully satisfied with the validity of their 
Episcopal ordination! — Now sir, unless you declare him 
ordained a prelatical bishop — a minister of the third order, 
the language of your discipline is deceptious. The terms you 
use are those belonging to the Church of England, and al- 
ways mean the same thing. 

" Episcopal office" always means the office of a prelatical 
bishop. 

"To set apart for Episcopal office," means to ordain a pres- 
byter such a bishop. 

"Letters of Episcopal order" means the credentials of the 
newly made bishop. 

In your discipline you use the very language and phrases 
of the Church of England to say that Mr. Wesley made Coke 
a prelatical bishop and in your office for the ordination of a 



138 THE GllEAT HON WHEEL. 

bishop, you copy the very office of the Church of England— 
you prescribe three distinct ordinations and give him supreme 
jurisdiction over all the inferior ministers, and compel them 
to take an oath of reverence and obedience to " obey in all 
things." But, you are forced to admit that you claim for 
Methodist Bishops the honor of being Episcopal Bishops of 
the first water — ministers the third order, (Mr. Wesley's 
heathenish priests ! ) 

Dr. Emory says : " In whatever sense distinct ordinations 
constitute orders, in the same sense Mr. Wesley certainly 
intended that we should have three orders. For he undoubt- 
edly instituted three distinct ordinations" 

Drs. Emory and Bangs say : " Three orders of ministers 
are recognized, and the duties peculiar to each are clearly 
defined." It is clear as noon day that Methodist Episcopacy 
is spurious, and the palming of it off upon the world a 
fraudulent operation performed by an ambitious, aspiring 
and power-loving clergy, had we no other facts than those 
above presented. 

One word, to save Mr. Wesley from the charges of these 
self-appointed Bishops and rulers. 

I do not believe that he ordained Mr. Coke a Bishop, 
he only formally set him apart by prayer for his assistant 
superintendent over the poor sheep in the wilderness — until 
such time as they should see fit to organize a distinct Church, 
and then he wished them to follow the Scripture and Apos- 
tolic Church, which Mr. Wesley did not believe recognized an 
Episcopal Bishop any more than a priest or " mitred infidel." 

He had no thought of ordaining a Bishop or forming a 
Church. 

In this I agree with an Episcopalian writer and Mr. Tay- 
lor in his late work. It is the only charitable opinion that 
can be passed in favor of Mr. Wesley : " The idea of ordain- 



KEPUBLICAKESM BACKWARDS. 139 

ing a Bishop for the infant Church in America, never entered 
Wesley's mind," and " he never conceived of the idea of organ- 
izing through him (Dr. Coke) an Episcopal Church in Ame- 
rica." — Strickland on Methodism, quoted by Gorrie, p. 218. 

It is asked of me to expose the falsehood and clerical 
intrigue that gave birth to "Methodism as it is 1" 

The humble title of superintendents under Mr. Wesley 
failed to satisfy Messrs. Coke and Asbury. They aspired for 
clerical power and coveted the imposing title of the English 
Bishops and their aristocratic rule and rank, and determined 
to secure by a " coup d'etat." The chicanery and fraud by 
which they accomplished it, we will allow a standard Me- 
thodist historian to relate in his own language. We quote 
from Jesse Lee, author of " Short History of Methodism." 
" In the course of this year, 1787, (three years after Confer- 
ence,) Mr. Asbury reprinted the General Minutes; but in a 
different form from what they were before. The title of the 
pamphlet was as follows. A form of Discipline for the min- 
isters, preachers, and members of the Methodist E. Church 
in America, considered and approved at a Conference held in 
Baltimore in the State of Maryland, the 27th December, 1784, 
the third question in the second section, and answer thus : 
Ques. Is there any other business to be done in Conference 1 
Ans. The election and ordaining of Bishops, Elders, and 
Deacons. " This" says Mr. Lee, " was the first time our su- 
perintendents ever gave themselves the self-constituted 
title of Bishops, in the Minutes. They (Coke and Asbury) 
changed the title themselves without the consent of 
conference.''^, Now you understand why I speak of Me- 
thodist Bishops as self-appointed, and too often self-import- 
ant rulers. Who made them to differ from their brethren ? 

" At the next conference," says Mr. Lee, they (Coke and 
Asbury,) asked the preachers if the word Bishop might 



140 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. 

stand in the minutes ; seeing that it was a scriptural name, 
(sill false, it is not in the word of God,) and the meaning of 
the word Bishop was the same as that of superintendent" 
Here was deception palmed off upon their more ignorant 
brethren. A scriptural superintendent, overseer or pastor, 
and an Anglican Episcopal or Methodist Episcopal Bishop, 
are as different as the pastor of a Baptist Church, and the 
Koman Pontiff! v{ Some of the preachers opposed the alter- 
ation and wished to retain the former title, but a majority 
of the preachers agreed to let the word Bishop remain." 
Now, Mr. Soule, will you declare to your followers in the 
face of this, that "at which time (Dec, 1784,) the General 
Conference, held in Baltimore, did UNANIMOUSLY re- 
ceive the said T. Coke and F. iisbury as their Bishops." 
Either you and your fellow Bishops publish a false state- 
ment to the world, or your own histories are not reliable. 
There is fraud somewhere. Look at Mr. Lee's testimony. 
He clearly shows that a fraud was perpetrated by Asbury, 
in the first instance, to get himself recognized as a Bishop ! 
No less a fraud than deliberately altering the minutes of 
Conference, to make it appear to the world that they (Coke 
and Asbury,) had been recognized as Bishops by the Con- 
ference four years before — since the first foundation of the 
Methodist Church, in 1784 ! Which was not the case, be- 
cause Wesley did not ordain them Bishops, but only his 
superintendents, and the first Conference did not at all, and 
never did unanimously receive them as Bishops ! And this 
change of their title for this purpose — a fraud designed to 
perpetrate a deception — took place in 1787! J^hus was con- 
summated one of the most startling frauds and false- 
hoods in modern times. Jesuitism never surpassed it in 
palming off the bones of malefactors for the relics of saints ! 
It was in this way Methodists in America have been, and 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 141 

still are, deceived. And what is equally surprising, and 
startling, the fraud is actually perpetrated to the present 
day? 

The hand that forged the minutes may have written the 
first section of the discipline, — it matters not, but do you 
not, Bishop Soule, and your fellow-rulers, perpetuate the 
fraud and the falsehood, by publishing the section under 
your signatures 1* Will the world allow this always to be 
unrepudiated 1 Will the honest Christian membership of 
your own Society ? Will they not call upon you to explain 
satisfactorily or repudiate both your declarations and priestly 
jurisdictions? Will you not deign to inform the world 
whether you are a bishop, a minister of the third order, or 
simply a minister of the first order — i. e. of one ordination ? 
Why are you a prelatkal bishop in your discipline, in ordi- 
nations in order and in authority, and yet claim before the 
world that you are only a simple presbyter ? ! ! Is such a 
policy fair dealing % W x ill not these questions be asked, and 
thus answered 1 Who devised the Methodist E. Church ? 
Ans. Messrs. Coke and Asbury. How was the Episcopacy 
and order and title of bishop introduced into the Church — 
when it was never known in the Societies 1 It was intro- 
duced by clerical fraud and falsehood, the order and the 
title was assumed by the first bishops, and the minutes of 
conference forged, to make the world believe that they were 
so received by the first Conference. Did the founders of 
the Methodist E. Church do this? They did, knowingly 
and wilfully, with intent to deceive future Methodists. Is 
the falsehood still perpetuated, and Methodists still deceived 1 
It is, by the unqualified endorsement of Joshua Soule, J. P. 



* If any one thinks my language unwarrantably severe, we refer 
him back to the declaration of Bishop Bascom in the last letter. 



112 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

O. Andrews, Wm. Capers, and Bobert Paine. I close this 
letter with the conviction that such men as Coke and Asbury 

were not qualified to found a Church of Christ, and 

I cannot recognize Methodism as such, and call the attention 
of my readers to an instance of the craft, cunning, intrigue, 
fraud and imposition, which have marked the beginning of 
all aristocracies and hierarchies and clerical usurpation that 
have ever oppressed humanity, opposed Christianity, or dark- 
ened and cursed the world. 



LETTEK XIII 



Methodism claims for Mr. Wesley and for its Bishops the 
" divine right of Kings" — that Mr. Wesley founded the Me- 
thodist Church in America, and the Bishops rule it, by the 
''• special grace of God" — Methodism still holds and teaches 
the Popish doctrine of order and succession. 

Dear Sir : — It was made evident, in my last letter, that 
the first bishops of Methodism were self-appointed, and that 
the Methodist E. Church was organized by them, yet to 
screen themselves they charged it upon Mr. Wesley. That 
he, a simple presbyter in the Church of England, presumed 
to ordain a fellowpresbyter for a bishop. The question now 
properly comes up, By what right did he do it ? What 
right do Methodists claim for him 1 

Do they claim that Mr. Wesley had any ecclesiastical 
authority from the Church of England? They admit he 
had none. 

Did the civil magistrate grant him leave? It is not 
claimed. 

Did they claim that Mr. Wesley took the authority from 
his own private views of Episcopacy, and the right of presby- 
ters to ordain a bishop of the third order. Nothing is more 
clearly established than that Mr. Wesley did not believe in 
the third order; that he abhorred it; that he deemed it al- 

(143) 



144 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

most, if not quite, sacrilegious for a minister to assume and 
exercise the rank and jurisdiction of a prelatical bishop ; that 
he spoke of them as " heathenish priests and mitred infidels." 
He did not feel himself authorized to ordain one, or to choose 
and appoint Episcopacy for his societies. 

Will Methodists claim that Mr. Wesley was warranted by 
the Scriptures to ordain a prelatical bishop? They cannot. 
They do not only teach that the Bible does not warrant such 
an officer, but violently opposes the existence and Antichris- 
tian rank, and spiritual jurisdiction of such a lordling. 

But have they such an order of ministers % Methodism 
is divided about it. The conference editors and small doc- 
tors of divinity, book-writers like Mr. Hinkle, McFerrin, 
Inskip, Gorrie, et cum multis aliis, deny, in the very face of 
their Discipline, that they have a third order, and the mass of 
Methodists believe them ; while the bishops and, the learned 
doctors of Methodism maintain that the bishops are verita- 
ble Popish ones of the third order, and by three ordinations ! 

Hear Dr. Emory : " In whatever sense distinct ordinations 
constitute distinct orders [not office!] in the same sense Mr. 
Wesley certainly intended that we should have three 
orders, for he undeniably instituted three ordinations."* 
Orders, not offices. 

Hear Dr. Emory and Dr. Bangs conjointly: "Three 
orders of ministers are recognized, and the duties peculiar 
to each are certainly defined. "f And Methodists believe 
their learned doctors and historians of course! Does it 
not require an unreasonable amount of credulity to be a 
Methodist % 

But Mr. Wesley must have had authority from some 



* Emory's Def. of Fathers, sec. 7. 

f Art. by Bangs and Emory. Buck's Th. Etta, 1825. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 145 

source, and since it is not allowed by either Episcopacy or 
by Scripture and they teach and hold that God gave Mr. 
Wesley the grace to usurp the special right to exercise the 
authority and to transmit it in regular succession of bishops 
to posterity ! This exalts the mission of Mr. Wesley to a 
dignity equal to Paul's. 

Dr. Bangs claims that Mr. Wesley had a divine call to 
found Methodism, and that God sanctioned him in the work! 
So Mr. Alexander Campbell doubtless considers that he has 
one. See Bangs' Original Church, p. 106. 

Mr. Inskip regards Mr. Wesley as especially raised up 
by God. " To meet the emergency which then existed, God 
raised up a company of great men, &c, — the Wesleys, 
Coke and Asbury, &c. These MEN devised this powerful 
instrumentality, i. e., Methodism. Page 54. 

" Methodism is a creation of Providence" i. e. } of God, 
since there is no chance. Its claims, are then, all as sacred 
as God's word ! Mr. Gorrie claims that Mr. Wesley acted 
under the especial direction, inspiration, or sanction of God. 
Page 215. "As Mr. Wesley, under God, was the founder 
of the Methodist Societies." If Mr. Wesley indeed acted 
" under God" in what he did, then is his Discipline (the first 
section excepted) as authoritative as the New Testament, 
and ougnt to be added to it and follow the Book of Revela- 
tions ! Methodists act upon this belief, we suppose,, when 
they exclude a member for not observing the laws of Mr. 
Wesley, though they do not violate any of the laws. of Jesus 
Christ*! 

The bishops first taught and still encourage these writers 
to teach the " idea that Methodism is a new Church, founded 
by Mr. Wesley, under the special sanction and direction of 
God !" " We believe that God's design in raising up the 
preachers called Methodists," &c. Dis. p. 4. 
7 



146 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

" God then thrust them out to raise up a holy people." 
Dis. p. 3. 

" Our venerable friend, who under God, had been the 
father," &c. 

Methodist editors freely admit Mr. Wesley's " divine call." 
;i As the father of Methodism, he had the right, of priority 
and seniority in the Methodist Societies, and as he deemed 
himself called by Divine Providence, to provide an ordained 
ministry and form of Government."* Was not his mission 
then inspired and equal to any apostle 1 

What do these bishops and writers teach that God called 
Mr. Wesley to do 1 Why, " under God" to ordain an epis- 
copal bishop,, and place him over his Societies, when under 
the illumination, inspiration or guidance of the same spirit, 
he did not believe that such an order was taught by Scrip- 
ture, or existed in the Primitive Churches — indeed, was ab- 
horrent to his own feelings ! This spirit was,, as inconsistent 
with itself as are the spirits of the " rappers" in our own day ! 

But the chief ministers of Methodism — the bishops and 
elders, persuade the people that they have some divine or 
superior right to govern them — that this power or right is 
given them by the Saviour or some one. Notice the phra- 
seology of the language used in ordaining a Methodist 
preacher. * 

Suppose him abjectly bowed ^o the very feet of his " chief 
ministers" who interrogate him, " Will you reverently obey 
your chief ministers to whom is committed the care and 

GOVERNMENT OVER YOU." 

Do not these chief ministers claim that it is committed 
to them to rule gratia divino or jure divino ? This is the 
divine right plead by kings, popes and despots, &c. 



Methodist Episcopalian. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 147 

Do you say that this power or right is committed to the 
chief ministers, by Wesley ? He had no more authority to 
invest a Methodist preacher with the absolute government 
of two or two thousand other preachers, than I have to elect 
the king of France. Man is only man's equal, in Church 
or State. 

Do you say the people conferred this authority upon the 
bishops ? The people have not now and never had any voice 
in the creation of a Methodist bishop, or in the election of a 
presiding elder or any minister of Methodism, as such. They 
never gave to any man this right. 

Who then, called, and therefore conferred upon Methodist 
bishops this fearful ministration of absolute power ? By 
whom do they teach their people they were called 1 See the 
office for their ordination, page 127. The candidate for the 
bishoprick, is asked by a bishop, " Are you persuaded that 
you are truly called to this ministratidli, according to the 
will of our Lord Jesus Christ V 

Ans. " I am so persuaded." If he is truly called by the 
grace and will of Christ, then woe is him if he does not 
govern. And mark it, he is not called to preach to save sin- 
ners — no, no such menial labor — he feels called to govern — 
to rule with absolute and pontifical sway, the laborious 
preachers. 

But if we look into the prayers used upon one of these 
occasions, we can learn the claimed source of this power. 

" Almighty God, giver of all good things, (this implies 
that the order or grace of a bishop is a good thing,) who by 
thy Holy Spirit hast appointed divers orders of ministers 
in thy Church, (this is certainly false which I prove by Me- 
thodist publications*) mercifully behold this thy servant 

* " On the whole, we think it apparent, that bishops, presbyters, and 



148 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

(another mistake) now called to the work and ministry of a 
bishop," &c. Called by whom 1 See question above. :; By 
the will of our Lord Jesus Christ." At what particular 
point of time is one of these favorites of Heaven indued 
with this supernatural right, or grace, or power. When the 
Holy Ghost is given to him. In what way does it come — 
through what medium is it conferred % Through the hands 
of a bishop and two elders. Read page 137. Upon the 
head of the kneeling candidate they lay their hands and pro- 
nounce the charmed words, " Receive the Holy Ghost for 
the office and work of a bishop of the Church of God now 
committed unto thee by the imposition of our hands, in the 
name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost. 
Amen.'''' 

" And remember that thou stir up the grace of God (here 
it is at last, the plea of kings and popes !) which is given 
thee (how, by whom'?) by the imposition of our hands, (and 
what an imposition!) for God hath not given us the spirit of 
fear, but of power, and love and soberness." 

We have sufficiently shown that the rulers of Methodism 
rule by the same right, claimed by the principalities and 
powers, and the rulers of the darkness of this world, and 
spiritual wickedness in all the high places of earth — the grace 
of God — a divine right — which is false, and as dishonoring 
to God as it is impious. 

Destroy this forged and iniquitous charter of tyrants, 
temporal and ecclesiastical, and Episcopal Methodism with 
all the soul-crushing tyrannies and habitations of cruelties 
with which humanity is now cursed, would fall. 



pastors, were originally the same. Hence, affectionate salutation is 
sent to a Church, with its bishops and deacons." Philadelphia Tract, 
No. 312, published by the Methodist Episcopal Church, 200 Mulberry 
Street. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 149 

Then why a third distinct ordination if an elder is of the 
same order with the bishop ? If it is only an office to which 
he is raised, why use the yery form of ordaining to a third 
order the order of prelatical bishop used by the Church of 
England 1 

Do Methodists claim and teach people the doctrine of 
succession also % Most certainly. We call Jesse Lee to 
the stand. " The bishops introduced a question in the annu- 
al minutes, which was as follows : Ques. Who are the per- 
sons who exercise the episcopal office in the Methodist 
Church in Europe and America V 

Ans. "John Wesley, Thomas Coke, and F. Asbury, by 
regular order and succession.''' 1 What a fabrication of Messrs. 
Coke and Asbury ! What an unhallowed scheme in them to 
usurp the office and authority of bishops ! Bishop John 
Wesley ! He said he had rather be called a rascal or a scoun- 
drel ; and well he might ! 

Mr. Inskip says : " Our design is to show, that it is our 
duty, as ministers of Christ, and the successors of the apos- 
tles and John Wesley !" 

Here we have the doctrine of regular order and succession 
from the apostle John Wesley, first bishop down to Joshua 
Soule. 

But do Methodists teach that Mr. Wesley did design to 
perpetuate and transmit a succession of bishops 1 Most as- 
suredly. 

" In conformity with this view r he deemed it necessary to 
PERr-ETUATE the authority among the Methodist preachers in 
America, that there should be in the first instance a general 
superintendent appointed to transmit that authority to pos- 
terity." 

Does not this look a little Popish 1 

The presbyters, or in the scriptural vocabulary of Metho- 



150 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

dism, the elders ■, whom he ordained for America, were not 
invested with that authority, but Dr. Coke, the superintend- 
ent, was! How did Dr. Coke possess the grace of impart- 
ing the grace of a bishop 1 Evidently because, it is claimed, 
that he received it from Wesley, and Wesley received it 
from God direct ! How do these bishops teach us that this 
grace is transmitted? Why, sir, like animal magnetism, 
through the hands or fingers of one bishop into the head of 
another. The head, not the heart, is the peculiar receptacle 
of this grace. If I am thought as making light of holy things, 
turn to Dis. p. 151, and read the way the new-made bishop 
receives the grace. 

" Then the Bishop and elders present shall lay their hands 
on the head of the elected persons, kneeling before them upon 
his knees — (it is an awfully solemn affair ! kneeling upon his 
knees, to be sure!) — the Bishop then saying "Receive the 
Holy Ghost — (blasphemy, is it not?) — for the office and 
work*of a Bishop of the Church of God (of Mr. Wesley) 
now committed unto thee by the imposition of our hands, 
in the name of the father, (if in the name means, by the au- 
thority of, as it does, this is a daring falsehood !) and of the 
son, (this is another,) and of the Holy Ghost, (this is ano- 
ther, three !) And remember that thou stir up the grace of 
God which is given thee, (how is the grace of God bestowed 1) 
by this imposition of our hands /" In the name of Luther, do 
E'rotestants teach in the nineteenth century one of the most 
blasphemous doctrines of Rome, that her priests can perform 
miracles, and impart by blessing, by prayers, or by the impo- 
sition of their hands, the very grace of God 1 ! Monstrous I 
monstrous ! It is priestcraft run mad ! S But this is not 
ill the teaching of that imposition, " for God hath not given 
us the spirit of fear, but of power, and love and soberness!" 
The reader can see that the terms " fear, love and soberness" 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 151 

are only put in as a sort of setting for the bishop's gem, 
" power" — they mean nothing in the connection. What is 
the doctrine of Methodist Episcopacy % That God gave to 
Wesley the grace to teach and rule as he did, (as) the first 
bishop of the new-latter-day-Zion, and that Wesley transmit- 
ted this invisible grace to the head of Coke, by the imposition 
of his hands, and Coke imparted it to the head of Asbury, and 
so the imposition has been passed along down to the last person 
you and your fellow bishops imposed upon. Now, sir, I do 
before Almighty God, and before the whole world, pronounce 
the whole of this third order, Episcopacy, ordination, and 
succession, and transmission of the grace of God through the 
fingers of priests, high-handed priestcraft, and an imposition 
upon the million of Methodists in America. I challenge 
contradiction. No one will dare to defend the doctrine 
that priests, whether in Papal or Protestant Rome, can im- 
part the " grace of God," or the " divine right" to lord it 
over God's heritage, by the imposition of their hands ; or to 
prove to me, or to the world, and hundreds of enquiring 
Methodists, that God hath given them the " spirit of power," 
thus to do. I unhesitatingly affirm that it is the monstrous 
doctrine of the Roman Catholic and Greek Apostacies — it is 
Popery in essence. It is the Poper^ of Protestantism ! 

Look at it 1 What is that doctrine % Simply thi s : " that 
Christ gave to his Apostles the right and grace of ordination, 
and through them transmitted this right to the first Bishop, 
the third of three orders of ministers, by succession, down to 
the present time." Thus the High Churchman tells us. 

Christ called Peter, and authorized him to transmit the 
mysterious grace, and power, and right of ordination to Linus, 
next bishop at Rome, and he to Cletus, and he to Clement, 
&c, &c, &c, down to the present Archbishop of Canter- 
bury. " Why," a writer asks, ' ; do these go back some 1800 



152 THE GREAT IK02v WHEEL. 

years to get this succession from Christ f* Evidently, be- 
cause Christ is that far off from them. But, according to 
Methodists, Christ was not so far off from Mr. Wesley. Oh, 
no, he " called " Mr. Wesley, and made him, by special 
favor, as much a bishop as the Archbishop of Canterbury 
or the Roman Pontiff! Well may Mr. Wesley reject the 
line of succession back to Peter. He is the Peter of 
Methodism. 

They may reject the old doctrine of apostolic succession 
farther back than Mr. Wesley, for he is their apostle, and we 
affirm as much an apostle as was Paul, if the testimony of 
Methodist writers and historians can be believed ! ! 

In concluding the subject of this letter and the one preced- 
ing it, you will perceive that I have exposed the fruitful 
seeds and germs of Popery. I have proved : 

1. That Mr. Wesley never ordained Dr. Coke a bishop — 
the third of three orders — deacon, presbyter, bishop, and 
that the statements of the Discipline (sec. 1,) are falsehoods 
and impositions upon the world. 

2. I have shown that a bishop in the Methodist Society, 
as his validity is recognized in the Discipline, and as is 
explained by Drs. Emory, Bangs, and other standard"' writ- 
ers, is a bishop of the third order, by divine call and regu- 
lar succession in the new and divinely appointed line from 
John Wesley. 

3. I have consequently shown that Methodists hold and 
teach the " divine right " of Mr. Wesley and all other bishops. 

4. That they teach the papal doctrine of succession. 
Finally, we can see from the instructive history presented 

in the assumptions of the Methodist bishops, the way in 
which the Roman Episcopacy begun, i. e. by management, 
fraud, and deception, and usurpation — little by little, until it 
became the overwhelming despotism of the world. 



LETTER XIV 



THE POLITICS OF METHODISM. 

" We are no Republicans, and never intend to be." — Wesley. 

Sir : — We have seen how the Methodist Episcopal Church 
was brought into being. Messrs. Coke and Asbury adopted 
the Book of Discipline prepared by Mr. Wesley for his so- 
cieties — not for a church — and making the proper additions, 
it became the statute book, the New Testament, of Meth- 
odists ! 

The subject of my inquiry in this letter is, what is the 
character of the government of this new society % is it re- 
publican, and so harmonizing with our institutions, and cul- 
tivating republican sentiments in the hearts of its members, 
or is it despotic and hierarchical, and so antagonistic to all 
that is republican ? This, sir, I conceive to be a matter of 
momentous importance, and should deeply concern every 
patriotic American Christian or citizen. The time is com- 
ing when they will be compelled to concern themselves, and 
it may then be too late, when Papal and Protestant hier- 
archism conspiring, shall have overthrown our civil and 
religious liberties. 

The Discipline of Mr. Wesley's societies was adopted 

with unimportant changes, as the statute book of the new 

Church, and that Discipline is a " rod of iron," comprising 

the laws of the purest, most perfect and oppressive despotism. 
7* (158) 



154 THE CTOEAT IRON WHEEL. 

"What was methodism prior to its being claimed as a Church, 
and what were the political views of Mr. Wesley, and of his 
American preachers ? 

Mr. Wesley declared himself an enemy of both civil 

AND RELIGIOUS LIBERTY ! ! 

He was a most violent opposer of our fathers in their 
struggle for independence. He was a most bitter maligner, 
and asperser, and libeller of the character of our revolution- 
ary heroes and patriots. Did he not publicly denounce 
John Hancock, the then President of the American Con- 
gress, with being a " smuggler' 1 and a " felon ?" Did he not 
charge him with having smuggled tea at noonday into Bos- 
ton ; and then, not to lose by his cargo, employing persons 
in disguise to throw into the sea the other tea, which 
came from London % And when asked, " Do you compare 
Mr. Hancock to a felon," did he not answer, " I do in this 
respect — I compare every smuggler to a felon — a private 
smuggler to a sneaking felon, a pickpocket — a noonday 
smuggler to a bold felon, a robber on the highway. And if 
a person of this undeniable character is made President of 
a Congress, 1 leave every man of sense to determine what 
is to be expected of them. — See Wesley's Works. 

Let no Methodist censure me for rebuking spiritual 
wickedness in high places, when they allow of such language 
from Mr. Wesley, in slandering one of the purest patriots 
who struggled for our glorious liberties. 

Mr. Wesley wrote and preached in scorn against all the 
principles of liberty, for which Hancock, Washington, 
and Jefferson contended, and did all in his power to counter- 
act the influence of American and British mind — did all in 
his power to urge on the mother country to crush the infant 
colonies, and destroy the traitors and rebels — and did all 
that he could by his pen and mighty influence over American 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 155 

Methodists, to encourage them to aid the tories here, or 
remain true to England. We copy a few of his political 
sentiments : 

" The supposition that the people are the origin of power, 
is every way indefensible." "You (Americans) profess to 
he contending for liberty, but it is a vain, empty profession.'" 
:1 No governments under heaven are so despotic as the re- 
publican ; no subjects are governed in so arbitrary a man- 
ner as those of a commonwealth." " Should any man talk or 
write of the Dutch Government as every cobbler does of the 
English, he would be laid in irons before he knew where he 
was. And wo be unto him. Republics show no mercy," &c. 

One more to cap the climax : " Probably that subtle 
spirit (the devil) hoped by adding to all those vices, the 
spirit of independence, to have overturned the whole work 
of God (i. e. Methodism !) as well as the British government 
in North America." Again, "the spirit of independence, 
which our poet so justly terms ' the glorious fruit of angels 
and of gods,' (that is in plain terms, of devils,) the same 
which so many call liberty, is overruled by the justice and 
mercy of God."* 

What does Mr. Wesley teach in the above, but that the 
overthrow of English despotism and the establishment of 
civil and religious liberty here, was the work of devils ! 
What then 1 Our fathers who fought and the heroes who bled 
for our liberties, were in Mr. Wesley's opinion, DEVILS ! ! 
and Methodists taught so to regard them ! Do you, Bishop 
Soule, so regard them to-day ? Does your Society so re- 
gard them 1 If not, I ask you in the name of every Ameri- 
can Christian and patriot, why do you still print and circulate 

* Let the reader, if he wishes to see more, read Mr. Wesley's sermon 
on " National Sins and Miseries." 



156 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

publications containing such sentiments throughout the 
length and breadth of this free land 1 ! 

It is not strange that all the Methodist preachers in this 
country were tories, and either returned to England, or took 
refuge among the tories. Mr. Asbury concealed himself 
among the tories of the State of Delaware !* 

But it is proper to enquire what were Mr. Wesley's reli- 
gious views of government ! Was he a Despot or Repub- 
lican *? Did he understand that the discipline enjoined a 
republican form of government % Did he consider his socie- 
ties republican, or intend them to be 1 See his letter to Mr. 
Mason, January 13, 1790 : 

" My Dear Brother : — As long as I live, the people shall 
have no share in choosing either stewards or leaders among 
the Methodists. We have not nor never had, any such cus- 
toms. We ARE NO REPUBLICANS, and NEVER INTEND TO BE. It 

would be better for those who are so minded to go quietly 
away."f Mr. Wesley spake the truth. Methodists to-day in 
church matters are no more republicans than they were when 
Mr. Wesley wrote the above. Do your people their leaders 
or stewards, or even the trustees to their meeting-houses ? 

We could not look for such a monarchist and enemy of 
Republican principles, as was Mr. Wesley, to establish a reli- 
gious society upon other than despotic or monarchical prin- 
ciples ! 

What is the character of the government of Methodism ? 
We will allow the late eloquent Cookman, a Methodist 
preacher of the Baltimore Conference, and Chaplain to the 
Senate of the United States, to illustrate it. 

In his speeches, pp. 145-6, comparing Methodism to a 
wheel within a wheel, he says : 



See Wesley's Life of Asbury. f Wesley's Works, vol. 7, p. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 157 

" Now, sir, let us apply ,t-his to Methodism. The great 
iron wheel in the system is itinerancy • and truly it grinds 
some of us tremendously ? the brazen wheel, attached and kept 
in motion by the former, is the local ministry ; the golden 
wheel, the doctrine and discipline of the Church, in full and 
successful operation. Now, sir, it is evident that the entire 
movement depends upon keeping the great iron wheel of 
itinerancy constantly and rapidly rolling round. But, to be 
more specific, and to make an application of this figure to 
American Methodism, let us carefully note the admirable 
and astounding movements of this wonderful machine. 
You will perceive there are wheels within wheels. First, 
there is the great outer wheel of Episcopacy, which accom- 
plishes its entire revolution once in four years. To this 
there are attached twenty-eight smaller wheels styled annual 
conferences, moving around once a year ; to these are attached 
one hundred wheels, designated presiding elders, moving twelve 
hundred other wheels, termed quarterly conferences, every three 
months : to these are attached four thousand wheels, styled 
travelling preachers, moving round once a month, and commu- 
nicating motion to thirty thousand wheels, called class leaders, 
moving round once a weelc, and who in turn, being attached 
to between seven and eight hundred thousand wheels, called 
members, give a sufficient impulse to whirl them round every 
day. O, sir, what a machine is this !" 

Truly, " what a machine is this !" We say to every one, 
" Let us carefully note the admirable and astounding move- 
ments of this wonderful machine !" How potent for good 
— if controlled by angels! How omnipotent for evil — if 
turned by men ! — Why, in essential character, it is the very 
system of the Jesuits of Rome ! It is, in principle, a crush- 
ing military despotism. It is astounding ! It is astounding 
tbit any set of men, after the American revolution, should 



158 • THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

have dared to fabricate, and set in motion, this great Iron 
Wheel of Episcopacy ! Just look at it, and you see it is a 
perfect system of passive obedience and non-resistance. Every 
smaller wheel being "attached" to the wheel next in power 
above it, and the whole moving in absolute control of the 
Great Outer Wheel of Episcopacy. The reflecting man 
must see on a glance, that all real liberty of thought and action 
is destroyed, as truly \ by this system, as by the ecclesiastical 
system of Rome — as by the drill of an army — as by any despot- 
ism upon the face of the earth. 



LETTER XV. 



Methodism a Great Iron Wheel — a Clerical Despotism, and 
yet American Christians tolerate and support it I 

Sir : — If, in my last letter to you, I seemed to use an 
unbecoming figure, in comparing Methodism to a " Great Iron 
Wheel" you must remember that the comparison was not 
mine, but one of your own most popular ministers, and since 
I write not for you, so much as to you for others, I beg the 
reader to examine the wonderful and astounding machine of 
American Methodism once more. Here it is from the lips 
of your own eloquent Cookman. 

"You will perceive there are ' wheels within wheels.' 
First. There is the great outer wheel of episcopacy, which 
accomplishes its entire revolution once in four years. To this 
are attached twenty-eight smaller wheels, styled annual con- 
ferences, moving round once a year ; to those are attached 
one hundred wheels, designated presiding elders, moving twelve 
hundred other wheels, termed quarterly conferences, every 
three months ; to these are attached four thousand wheels, 
styled travelling preachers, moving round once a month, and 
communicating motion to thirty thousand wheels, called class- 
leaders, moving round once a week, and who, in turn, being 
attached to between seven and eight hundred thousand wheels, 

(159) 



160 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

called members, give a sufficient impulse to whirl them 
around every day. What a machine is this? — Cookman. 

Here we see that each wheel is a passive thing, turned by 
a power above it, and it forced by this superior power to 
whirl the wheel below attached to it, until the last wheels 
act upon the people to whirl them around each day ! What 
is Methodism but a perfect system of passive obedience and 
non-resistance ? The great driving, all-controlling and all- 
directing power is in the Great outer Wheel — the bishops. 
What is it but a monstrous system of clerical absolutism! 
the ' most fearful Hierarchism on the face of the earth 1 A 
distinguished Presbyterian writer and editor of the Calvinis- 
tic Magazine,* has thus forcibly commented upon Mr. Cook- 
man's " Great Iron Wheel." " It is astounding that any set 
of men, after the American revolution, should have dared to 
fabricate, and set in motion, this great Iron Wheel of des- 
potism." But it is not this that astonishes me — knowing the 
authors of it were ambitious priests ; but it is astounding to 
me, beyond my power to describe, how one million of 
American freemen — patriot Christians— the sons and daugh- 
ters of revolutionary heroes,, can be made " to be whirled 
around every day" at the pleasure of a class of petty spiritual 
rulers and lordlings ? — to be the merest puppets ever wired, 
or worked by stagemen ! It is this that astonishes me be- 
yond measure, and the reflection sickens my very heart. Oh, 
my country, my country ! — how much it is to be feared for 
thy liberties from these ! Oh, religion — what an astounding 
machine, managed by ambitious and designing priests, is at 
work to overthrow thee ! 



* F. A. Ross, D.D., pastor of Pres. Church, Chattanooga, Term. Mr 
Ross is sustained in his views by the most eminent members and pro- 
fessors at Princeton, and by Presbyterians generally. 




METHODISM MECHANICALLY ILLUfcTR ITEB.* 
Repubucamsm Backwards; or, Methodism according to Cooksu.w— Page ICO. 






LOOK AT THIS! 

A Romish priest swearing to obey liis master, the Pope, and whomsoever lie 
niny see fit to plaee over him. 



EEFUELICANISAI BACKWARDS. 161 

Do you say that it is because it is not the grinding ma- 
chine that Mr. Cookman represented it, that your members 
support it ? Methodism is so declared to be by a living 
bishop ! In 1844, the General Conference, the " Outer 
Wheel," suspended Bishop Andrew by an arbitrary act. Mr. 
Hamlin e sustained the act, and argued, that the Conference 
had the power. 

" Mr. Hamline argued, that the General Conference had 
the power to suspend the Bishop, in a summary manner, 
without trial — because, according to the genius of the Metho- 
dist system, every officer, under the Bishop, could be thus 
suspended, or removed from office. He affirmed, that the 
Class-Leader could be removed by the Itinerant Pastor — 
the Itinerant Pastor by the Presiding Elder or Bishop — the 
Presiding Elder by the Bishop — at any time during the in- 
terval of Conference." Mr. Hamline summed up his evidence 
by saying, that the Methodist system of removal or suspen- 
sion was ' peculiar.'' 

''First. That suspension, removal, or deposition from 
office, in the Methodist Episcopal Church, is ' summary? 
1 Without accusation, trial, or formal sentence. Ministerial, 
not judicial. 1 

" Secondly. Pt is for no crime, generally for no misd?neanor, 
but for being unacceptable? 

'* Thirdly. That ' most of the removals are by a sole agent, 
namely, by a Bishop, a Preacher whose will is omnipotent in 
the premises? 

'•'• Fourthly. That ' the moving officer is not legally obliged 
to assign any cause for despotism. If he do so, it is through 
courtesy, and not of 'right? 

'• Fifthly. That ' the deposed has no appeaV — that * if indis- 
creetly or unnecessarily removed, he must submit ; for there is 
no tribunal authorized to cure the error, or rectify the wrong.' 



162 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

" This system, Mr. Hamline acknowledges, is one of sur- 
passing energy, and centralizing of power — and he pronounces 

it ' WORTHY OF ALL EULOGY.' 

"There is the system — from the lips of a Methodist 
Preacher — now a Methodist Bishop ! Look at it, ye sober 
and reflecting lovers of religious liberty, and civil too. — 
Look at it, ye members of the Methodist Church. Look at 
it. What ! A system ' worthy of all eulogy ! ' What say 
you, Genius of America? She answers, '•The Methodist sys- 
tem is death to all the institutions for which Washington fought 
and freemen died V What says the Gospel % The Gospel tells 
us, ' The Methodist system is Antichrist, — For it is the very 
identical priestly power which has crushed and trodden under 
foot the liberty wherewith Christ doth make free, in every age 
cf the world /' Worthy of all eulogy! Look at it — eight 
hundred thousand members, attached to thirty thousand class 
leaders, and.every one of these thirty thousand class leaders 
holding his office at the mere discretion of some one of four 
thousand travelling Preachers, and every one of these four 
thousand itinerant Preachers moving in his circuit, at the 
omnipotent will of some one of a hundred presiding Elders — ► 
and every one of these hundred presiding Elders holding his 
station at the mere pleasure of some one of a half dozen 
bishops; — and when summarily removed from office, none 
may ask the reason why, nor the despot the reason give ! 
And this is the system, lauded by those who wield it, as 
* worthy of all eulogy !' This is said in the United States— 
and American freemen — not foreign Roman Catholics, toler- 
ate, aye, submit to the usurpation ! 

" Will it be said, in reply to these remarks, that the 
General Conference was divided on the resolution advocated 
by Mr. Hamline 1 And that the Methodist Episcopal Church 
South, does not sanction the views of Mr. Hamline ? But 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 163 

we will not have dust cast in our eyes. Those who now 
constitute the Methodist Church South, denied the applica- 
bility of Mr. Hamline's summary process to the bishopts, on 
the part of the General Conference, but admitted, (so far as 
we understand,) the correctness of Mr. Hamline's interpre- 
tation of their Discipline, as to all the officers below the 
bishops. But let us press this point a little farther. We 
will ask some questions. 

" 1. Mr. Hamline and the General Conference say, that 
removal from office in the Methodist Church is ' peculiar.' 
" 2. Mr. Hamline and the General Conference say, it is 
1 summary' — ' without accusation, trial, or formal sentence — 
ministerial, not judicial.' Will you deny it 1 

" 3. Mr. Hamline and the General Conference say, ' re- 
movals are for no crime, generally for no misdemeanor, but for 
being unacceptable.' Will you deny it ? 

" 4. Mr. Hamline and the General Conference say, that 
' most removals are by a sole agent, namely, a bishop or a 
preacher, whose will is omnipotent in the premises.'' Will you 
deny it 1 • 

" 5. Mr. Hamline and the General Conference say, that 
' the removing officer is not legally obliged to assign any cause 
for deposing. If he do w, it is through courtesy, and not of 
right.' Will you deny it % 

"6. Mr. Hamline and the General Conference say, that 
' the deposed officer has no appeal — that if indiscreetly or un- 
necessarily removed, he must submit ; for there is no tribunal 
authorized to cure the error, or rectify the wrong' Will you 
deny it?"* 

I now call upon you, sir, to look this monstrous system of 
clerical usurpation and despotism full in the face, and tell 

* Calvinistic Magazine. 



164: THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. 

the people of Tennessee, of the whole South, if you consider 
such a system worthy of all praise by Christian freemen 1 
Unseal your lips, and, with your eye upon that dread, that 
awful bar, before which you must soon stand, say, if you 
dare say, that it is not both anti-scriptural and anti-republi- 
can'? Tell them, if you dare, with your eye on the last 
Testament of Christ, that our blessed Saviour ever taught, or 
enjoined upon his ministers to teach, such a God dishonoring 
and man- debasing system as Methodism ! Read his last 
words, teaching them to " observe all things, whatsoever / 
have commanded." Did Christ originally command the 
Great Iron Wheel of Methodism to be rolled by an army of 
four thousand priestly rulers, over the rights and consciences 
of his followers % Did he redeem them by his blood, and 
make them kings and priests unto God, to be slaves to such 
a horde of petty lordlings, to be enslaved and oppressed by 
such a consolidated spiritual tyranny as this Iron Wheel ? 
God forbid ! 

Do you deny that Methodism is a despotism ? Then can 
you affirm that the Russian, Turkish and Chinese despotisms 
are pure republics, and the subjects of the same are in the 
perfect enjoyment of the unspeakable blessings of civil and 
religious liberty 1 Will Bishop Soule tell us if the people 
in the Methodist Society, according to the system, (we thank 
God the system does not work perfectly, because it is in 
free America) — " will he tell us, if the people, as recognized 
by the system — the people — the members, whirled by the 
Great Iron Wheel, are not the merest puppets — moving 
round ■ every day' under the ' whirV of the class-leaders — 
who are whirled around by the travelling preachers — who 
are whirled around by the presiding elders — who are whirled 
around by the bishops — who are whirled around by the 
General Conference ? Will you tell us, if the wheel turned 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 165 

at proper speed, and all the parts were working right, whether 
these eight hundred thousand members might not be made 
to whirl around exactly alike — even dressed to order in stiff 
collars on one side, and dove-colored bonnets without rib- 
bons on the other — doing identically the same thing, and at 
the same time, in every place, where the wheel moved, from 
the St. Johns to the Rio Grande ?" 

"There is a cotton factory, in which a thousand spindles 
whirl round under the impulse of so many bands, which 
bands are whirled by so many drums, which drums are 
whirled by a long shaft-line of communication, which shaft is 
whirled by a great water-wheel, and every spindle spins just 
so much cotton, a day, an hour, a minute. So with this 
Great Iron Wheel. Could it be made to work as perfectly 
as is desired by those who turn it, every Church member 
would whirl around — a machine, living, it is true, but as 
really a machine, as each spindle in the factory. The per- 
fection of a soldier, said Bonaparte, is that he be an intelli- 
gent machine, having neither thought nor will of his own. 
This is the result aimed at, and in a lamentable degree 
accomplished by the Roman Catholic system — and this 
must be the result of the perfect motion of the Great Iron 

Wheel. Here a very important question comes up . From 
whence does the Great Iron Wheel derive its power ? Listen! 
" This General Conference," says Mr. Hamline, " is the 
sun in our orderly and beautiful system. Look into the 
Discipline. First, you have our Articles of Religion, in 
which God appears. What is next in order? The General 

Conference, which, like the orb of day, rises to shed light on 
the surrounding scene. It is first shaped, or fashioned, and 
then, like Adam, by his Maker, is endowed with dominion, 
and made imperial in its relations ; and, saving the slight 
reservation of the constitution, it is all-controlling in its 
influences !" There it is , There you have the answer to 



166 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

the question, from whence does the Great Iron Wheel derive 
its power 1 You see that the power thus professed by the 
General Conference, is claimed to be derived directly from 
God ! Yes. There you have it. ' ; It," the General Confer- 
ence, " is first shaped and fashioned, and then, like Adam by 
his Maker, is endowed with dominion and made imperial!" 
Yes, God has endowed the General Conference of the Meth- 
odist Episcopal Church with dominion, and made it imperial. 
Not Regal. No. Regal dominion was not despotic enough. 
But God has endowed the Conference with dominion, and 
made it imperial. The Ccesar, the Czar, the Emperor is 
the highest style of power, unlimited, and unchecked. God 
has made the General Conference imperial. So said Mr. 
Hamline, and so said the General Conference itself. 

" Now, we ask, where is the power of the people in this 
system % Answer. No where. No where. They are the 
spindles, whirling, yonder, under the augmented, transmitted 
power through drums, and bands, and -wheels. Where are 
the people'? There they are, whirling around every day, 
attached to the class leaders, who are attached to the itiner- 
ants, who are attached to the Presiding Elders, who are at- 
tached to the Bishops, under the imperial control of the outer, 
Great Iron Wheel of the General Conference." 

" The thing is a naked despotism — imperial power in an 
ecclesiastical aristocracy, unblushingly avowed and glorified 
in. We have said, that in essence, this system is the same 
as that of the Jesuits of Rome. The Edinburgh Encyclo- 
paedia says: " Loyola, (the founder of the Jesuits,) resolved 
that the government of the Jesuits should be absolutely mo- 
narchical. A General, chosen for life by deputies from the 
several provinces, possessed supreme and independent power, 
extending to every person, and applying to every case. 
Every member of the order, the instant that he entered its 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 167 

pale, surrendered all freedom of thought and action ; and 
every personal feeling was superseded by the interests of 
that body to which he had attached himself. He went wher- 
ever he was ordered ; he performed whatever he was com- 
manded ; he suffered whatever he was enjoined ; he became 
a mere passive instrument, incapable of resistance. The 
gradation of rank was only a gradation in slavery ; and as 
perfect a despotism over a large body of men, dispersed 
over the face of the earth, was never before realized." 

I request that this system of the Jesuits may be com- 
pared with the Great Iron Wheel, and with the imperial 
power, claimed for the General Conference, and derived, by 
Mr. Hamline and the Conference, right from God, by four 
thousand travelling preachers, and thirty thousand class- 
leaders ; and strange to say, a half million of members, are 
made to believe that they enjoy religious liberty, when de- 
prived of every governmental right and liberty for which 
blood was shed on the* battle fields of the Kevolution, or the 
hill of Calvary ! Do the people enjoy liberty ? Look at 
the people under the revolutions of this Wheel- within-a-wheel 
power I* Does not every reader see that it is Republi- 
canism Backwards ? Is not such a government as anti- 
American as it is despotic 1 Are not the people governed 
without the faintest voice in the election of their rulers or 
direction of their government 1 Is not during power con- 
centrated in the great ponderous outer wheel, the Episcopa- 
cy, or General Conference 1 Are not the people — the mem- 
bers — arrogantly denied the right to participate in the 
legislative councils of their Church 1 Is not this anti-Ameri- 
can 1 Read the Declaration of Rights adopted by the Con- 
tinental Congress, Oct. 14, 1774 : 

* Our artist has illustrated their liberty with great clearness. 



168 



THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 



" Resolved, 4, — That the foundation of English liberty, 
and of all free government, is a right in the people to partici- 
pate in their legislative council." 

Is Methodism, then, a free government? Ought not 
American citizens to be as free in Church as in State 1 Do 
they despise the legacy of our hero ancestors ? Where, oh ! 
where is the spirit that bled at Lexington, at Bunker's Hill, 
and at Yorktown. Is it enthroned and consecrate in the 
bosoms of American Methodists who can thus surrender the 
most inestimable rights of men? 



LETTER XVI 



Methodism the Popery of Protestantism — as absolute and all- 
controlling as Jesuitism — Papal Bishops. 

Dear Sir : — In my last, I asserted that the Methodism of 
the Discipline was a naked clerical despotism, and, in essence, 
Popery itself, and the worst form of Popery, Jesuitism. 

Let us impartially compare them. The Edinburgh Ency- 
clopedia says : " Loyola (the founder of the Jesuits) resolved 
that the government of the Jesuits should be absolutely mo- 
narchical. A General, chosen for life by deputies from the 
several provinces, possessed supreme and independent pow- 
er, extending to every person, and applying to every case. 
Every member of the order, the instant that he entered its 
pale, surrendered all freedom of thought and action ; and 
every personal feeling was superseded by the interests of 
that body to which he had attached himself. He went wher- 
ever he was ordered ; he performed whatever he was com- 
manded ; he suffered whatever he was enjoined ; he became 
a mere passive instrument incapable of resistance. The gra- 
dation of rank was only a gradation in slavery ; and as per- 
fect a despotism over a large body of men, dispersed over 
the face of the earth, was never before realized." 

Now, will you turn back to the Wheel-illustration by 
your own Cookman ? The great outer wheel — the bishops 
8 a&) 



170 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

answer to the General of the Society of Jesuits. Method, 
ism has many Generals instead of one ; so that it is Jesuit- 
ism in this respect, only "a great deal more so/" The power 
of the bishops, like that of the General of the Jesuits, extends 
over and through the whole Society — over all its agents and 
officers. 

The second feature is also alike. Every minister or mem- 
ber, the instant he enters Methodism, surrenders all religious 
freedom! Think of this, Americans — think of it ! He is 
no longer his own, but the servant, if a member, of all the 
clergy, and the leaders or petty overseers they appoint over 
him besides. The most ignoble sort of thraldom ! If a 
minister, while he rules those under him, he himself is a 
slave of his chief ministers — those above him in rank ! 
Therefore the third feature holds good — "gradation in rank 
is only gradation in slavery /" 

The fourth general feature of Jesuitism is also perfect in 
Methodism. The minister who joins the Society of Mr. 
Wesley is compelled to go wherever he is ordered, without 
asking any cause or questions ; return when commanded ; to 
perform whatever is enjoined by his chief ministers ; is a 
mere passive tool in the hands of his masters, to do their 
gracious wills and biddings ! You may say that Methodist 
ministers elect their bishops — so do the Jesuits elect their 
General ! And many a slave chooses his master ; nothing 
is more common. But is he any the less a slave ? 

American Christians have heard much of the awful oath 
taken by Catholic priests and bishops to the Pope ; many 
never saw it. I lay it before you, and place by its side the 
oath you enjoin upon all your ministers to obey vou, together 
with your fellow-bishops, the Popes of Methodism ; and I 
humbly ask you to point out to me any important differ- 
ence : 







LOOK AT TJU.-5 ! 

A Romish priest swearing to obey his master, the Pope, and whomsoever he 

may see fit to place over him. 



REPUBLIC ANISM BACKWARDS. 171 



THE OATH OF A ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST. 

" I, N., elect of the church of N., from henceforward will 
be faithful and obedient to St. Peter the Apostle, and to the 
holy Roman Church, and to our Lord, the Lord N., and to 
his successors canonically coming in. I will neither advise, 
consent, nor do any thing that they may lose life or member, 
or that their persons may be seized, or hands anywise laid 
upon them, or any injuries offered to them, under any pre- 
tence whatsoever. The counsel which they shall entrust me 
withal, by themselves, their messengers, or letters, I will not, 
knowingly, reveal to any, to their prejudice. I will help 
them to defend and keep the Roman Papacy, and the royal- 
ties of St. Peter, saving my order against all men. The 
Legate of the Apostolic See going and coming, I will honor- 
ably treat and help in his necessities. The rights, honors, 
privileges, and authority of the holy Roman Church, of our 
Lord the Pope, and his aforesaid successors, I will endeavor 
to preserve, defend, increase, and advance. I will not be 
in any council, action, or treaty, in which shall be plotted 
against our said Lord and the said Roman Church, anything 
to the hurt or prejudice of their persons, right, honor, state, 
or power, and if I shall know any such thing to be treated 
or agitated by any whatsoever, I will hinder it to the extent 
of my power ; and as soon as I can, will signify it to our 
said Lord, or to some other, by whom it may come to his 
knowledge. The rules of the holy fathers, the apostolic de- 
crees, ordinances, or disposals, reservations, provisions, and 
mandates, I will observe with all my might, and cause to be 
observed by others. Heretics, schismatics, and rebels to 
our said Lord, or his aforesaid successors, I will to the extent 
of my power persecute and oppose." 



172 THE GKEAT IRON WHEEL. 

Now consider the oaths of Deacons and Elders to their 
Lords, the bishops. Imagine professed Protestant Chris- 
tians and ministers of Christ Jesus, if you can do it, upon 
bended knees bowing before the Bishop, and solemnly vowing 
in God's awful name to discharge the items of the following 
oaths : 

METHODIST DEACON^ VOW. 

" The Bishop.— Will you REVERENTLY OBEY them, 
to whom the charge and government over you is committed 
following with a glad mind and will their godly {ghostly !) 
admonitions 1 . 

A. — I will endeavor to do so, " the Lord being my help- 
er ! !" 

Q. — To whom is committed the charge and government 
over Deacons by the Discipline 1 

A. — To Presiding Elders and Bishops. 

Is not here a solemn void taken to obey — and that most 
reverently — these their spiritual lords and masters ? 

Is there not a solemn appeal made to God for the truth Jk 
of their willingness to obey 1 It is, then, an oath. 

Now turn to Discipline, pp. 136-137. In the ordination'^ 
of Elders, the following most solemn and awful oath is ad 
ministered : 

A METHODIST ELDEr's OATH. 

The bishop reads — "And now that this present congrega-! 
tion of Christ here assembled may also understand you 
minis and wills in * these* things, and that this your promfa 
may the more move you to do your duties, ye shall answe: 
plainly to these things which we, in the name of God an 
his Church, shall demand of you touching the same." 

Is not this an oath! is it not a solemn appeal to God ?-^ 



. 







How like the last scene ! Hftat is the difference in prineipl 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 173 

is not this affirmation put in the name of God ? It is, then, 
an oath. 

What is it these servants answer to one question in the 
category 1 

The Bishop. — " Will you reverently obey your chief 
ministers, unto whom is committed the charge and govern- 
ment over you ; following with a glad mind and will their 
godly admonitions, submitting yourself to their godly judg- 
ments 2" 

Ans. " I will do so, the Lord being my helper / / " 

Read it again — is it not a mistake 1 Can such a solemn, 
awful oath fall from a professing Christian's, much less Chris- 
tian minister's lips ! Read it : 

The bishop says : " Will you reverently obey your 
chief ministers, unto whom is committed the charge and 

GOVERNMENT OVER YOU \ FOLLOWING WITH A GLAD MIND AND 
WILL THEIR GODLY ADMONITIONS, SUBMITTING YOURSELVES TO 
THEIR GODLY JUDGMENTS ] " 

Answer of the elder : " I will so do, the Lord [forgive 
the poor deluded soul,] being my helper." 

Blessed Saviour, and can this be the language of one of 
thy ministers — of a Protestant Christian freeman, in the 
nineteenth century 1 And didst thou not most solemnly 
command thy disciples to acknowledge no master — no law- 
giver but thyself; and to teach only what thou hast enjoined 
upon them ? And do they not here, as do the ministers of 
Antichrist, solemnly vow to take self-appointed lordlings 
for their masters, in all things regardless of what thou hast 
commanded — and that so fully, so absolutely, as to exer- 
cise no judgment or will of their own in reserving any liberty 
to consult thy will? Father, forgive them, they surely 
know not of what they do ! Their leaders do cause them 
to err. 



174 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

Is not this, Bishop Soule, a m.ore stringent oath than the 
Catholic priests take to obey and do the bidding of their 
Pope 1 Does it not positively deprive one of the exercise 
of any mind, or will, or judgment, of his own ? Does it not 
reduce the Methodist circuit-rider and elder to a mere pas- 
sive tool, blindly subservient to the will and wishes of their 
ghostly superiors % Am I mistaken ? Read under the duties 
of preachers page 50 : " Act in all things, not according to 
your own will, but as a son (a slave would be abetter word) 
in the gospel. As such it is your duty to employ your time 
in the manner which we direct, in preaching and visiting 
from house to house, in reading, meditation, and prayer ; 
above all [all what % above any one, or all the above — 
reading the Bible or prayer to God?] above all, if you labor 
with us in the Lord's vineyard, it is needful you should do 
that part of the work which we advise, at those times and 
places which we judge most for his glory ." — Discipline, p. 50. 

I unhesitatingly pronounce the above oath and requisitions 
upon the inferior ministers of Methodism, equally, and more, 
if possible, degrading than the oath of submission required 
of Catholic priests — equal, fully, to the darkest Jesuitism. 
Methodist bishops require of their inferiors the reverence and 
submission due to God alone — reverential, absolute and perfect 
obedience! ! It is of Antichrist, since the chief ministers 
put themselves in the place of Christ — and require the in- 
ferior orders to obey them implicitly in all things, having no 
thought, will, or judgment of their own, or the least concern 
for the commands of Jesus Christ, or the glory of God! 

It is a most clear rejection of the authority and directing 
guidance of God, on the part of Methodist ministers. The 
direction God gave to his servant Jeremiah is still in force. 
" Say not I am a child : (to be ordered about by others — 
a son to any one in the gospel ) for thou shalt go to all that 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 175 

I send thee, and whatsoever / command thee thou shalt 
speak." But those Methodist bishops presumptuously and 
impiously thrust themselves before God and his servants, 
and assuming the prerogative of the Almighty, virtually say, 
" Not so, but you must be a son to us, and go to all, and 
wherever, we shall send thee, and have no concern, no mind 
or will, for what God commands, or do what is for his glory, 
but whatsoever we command, direct, you must speak 
and do ! ! 

Then it is also a positive and aggravated rejection of Jesus 
Christ as their master — and of his supreme authority over 
them, both by Methodist bishops and their ministers. Christ 
positively commands, " Call no man your father upon earth 
(if Methodist ministers acknowledge themselves sons in the 
gospel to the bishops, and do they not acknowledge the 
bishops to be their fathers ?) for one is your father who is 
in heaven." 

" Neither be ye called masters ; for one is your master ; 
even Christ, and all ye are brethren" i. e. only equals in rank 
and authority. 

Can a methodist minister say that Christ is his only mas- 
ter 1 He would assert falsely. Let him look at his oath. 
He has solemnly abjured Christ, and taken men for his 
master — his presiding elders and bishops ! 

Are not Methodist ministers, then, in the most odious 
sense, men-servers ? They are to do the will of their mas- 
ters, the bishops, in every respect whatever, whenever, and 
wherever it may be ! A consolidated clerical despotism — 
a hierarchy of the most effective and powerful kind ! It is 
anti-Christ— I unhesitatingly pronounce it ANTICHRIST ! ! 
The Catholic priest must reverence as well as obey his superiors 
— so must a Methodist ! But the Catholic is required to 
reject the Bible as the only rule of his faith and practice, and 



176 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

to swear his adhesion to the traditions, ordinances, discip- 
line, and rules of his father, the Pope, and his councils. This 
we also consider impious. But Methodist ministers are sol- 
emnly bound to do the same thing — reject the Bible as their 
only rule of faith and practice, and put the Discipline — 
the statute book — the laws and traditions of the bishops, 
and the Conference, in its place ! 

He is sworn, for he takes a solemn oath, to p.lace the 
Discipline above the Bible, as the Catholic does the decisions 
of the Pope and his councils ! See his Discipline, page 50, 
"And remember, a Methodist preacher is to mind every 
point, great and small, in the Methodist Discipline — there- 
fore, you will need all the sense and grace you have." 

The Discipline is made, and he vows to make it, his Bible ! 
—it is above the word of God to him ; he is to obey the Dis- 
cipline, in preference to the Bible ! It is not for him to 
care what Christ commands ; for, above reading and prayer, 
he is to " do what his chief ministers command him" — it is 
not for him to seek to please God, but his bishop and cleri- 
cal masters ; nor is he to be concerned for the glory of God, 
but of Methodism ! He may safely preach that there are 
many non-essentials in the New Testament, but he must 
hold and teach that there are none in the Discipline — 
for he is pledged to observe every point, great and small, 
in it ! ! 

To my feelings, the above seems little short of blasphemy. 
I am shocked and shudder at the reflection. I have read and 
reread these pages, and my whole frame trembles, and my 
nerves quiver at every perusal. I cannot help it. I am 
either besides myself, or it is something supremely awful 
that 1 contemplate. To my mind it seems that the Method- 
ist preacher who takes the above vow, takes man for his 
God — takes a solemn oath of allegiance to serve and obey 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 177 

a presumptuous mortal, who has the arrogance to demand 
it at his hands ! It is to my mind downright idolatry, and 
that of the grossest kind ! To obey and to serve a mortal, 
religiously, is to render to men what we owe to God alone. 
To serve or obey, is to worship. This is the definition given 
by Christ : " Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him 
only shalt thou serve." To obey is to serve, to serve is to 
worship — to worship or obey a mortal, or any body in reli- 
gion but God, is idolatry. 

Hence, to obey the commands, behests, and arbitrary 
dictation of spiritual masters and rulers — called " chief 
ministers" — is to serve them, is to worship them — yielding 
them that homage, reverence, and obedience due to Christ 
alone. 

No ; I might be crushed to earth — racked upon the wheel, 
until every limb was dissevered, burnt to ashes, or torn, 
piecemeal, but never, no, never, unless God should forsake 
me, would I, on bended knee, in the name of God, swear 
such allegiance to mortal — to any created being — no, not to 
the arch-angel Gabriel himself! 

What true American freeman, through whose heart dashes 
the pure, untainted blood of Freedom's sires, would bend and 
swear blind and implicit servitude to a tyrant over both his 
conscience and his judgment ! What Christian minister, who 
feels the warm glowings of the sacred fire of Christian free- 
dom in his heart — upon whose eye has gleamed the light — 
w r hose bosom has felt the throbbings of that " glorious li- 
berty," wherewith Christ makes free — who has felt the 
emancipating, disenthralling genius and power of the gospel 
of man's salvation, would tamely succumb to such a dis- 
graceful and degrading yoke of bondage, as to call men their 
masters, and become the servants of men ; " Ye are bought 
with a price, be not ye the servants of men" says Paul. Ex- 
8* 



178 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

cuse me ; I cannot even copy these Antichristian and ab- 
horrent oath 3, without my blood taking fire in " holy indig- 
nation." 

The Pope himself makes no greater demand than this— 
nothing that more clearly stamps and characterizes him as 
"Antichrist," or the " Man of Sin," and Son of Perdition. 

But these preachers solemnly swear to obey the " godly 
judgment" (is there no infallibility implied here 1) of their 
chief ministers ! What are some of the requisitions 1 

1. To take care that every part of our Discipline be en- 
forced in his district. 

2. To attend the bishops when present in his district. 
Page 40. Pretty lackeying this ! ! The ministers of Christ, 
the lackeys of spiritual potentates ! See the oath of the Ca- 
tholic Priest. He is sworn to attend and wait upon the 
Pope when his Holiness passes through his district// 

3. He shall read the rules of the Society with the aid of 
the other preachers, once a year in every congregation, and 
once a quarter in every Society. Page 44. 

In receiving a preacher into full connection, the following 
questions are asked : 

" Do you know the rules of Society — of the bands ? Do 
you keep them % Plave you read the form of Discipline 1 
Are you willing to conform to them ? Have you considered 
the rules of a preacher, especially the 1st, 10th and 12th? 
Will you keep them for conscience sake V 

If he answers these, and many more, in the affirmative, 
the Conference admits him, and gives him a Discipline, (not 
a New Testament,) and this commission : "As long as you 
freely consent to, and earnestly endeavor to walk by these 
rules, we shall rejoice to acknowledge you as a fellow-laborer." 

Not so long as he observes implicitly the New Testament, 
but the Bishop's Testament, is he acknowledged ; not so long 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 179 

as he faithfully serves Christ, but the u Hierarchy," and 
obeys his superiors. 

But what are these three rules so especially enjoined 
above all others % To preach, to study God's Word, and 
follow none but Christ? No, but to preach, study and fol- 
low the Discipline, and above all, obey us, your chief min- 
isters ! ! 

" 1st Rule. To preach. 

" 10th. Be punctual. Do every thing exactly at the time. 
And do not mend our rules but keep them. Mark it, keep 
' our rules ! /' 

"11th. (Last clause of the rule.) And remember! a 
Methodist preacher is to mind every point. GREAT and 
small, in the Methodist Discipline ! Therefore you will need 
to exercise all the sense (1 !) and grace you have ;" and as 
little of (he liberty of conscience, freedom of thought, fear of 
God as possible, should have been added, for these men 
servers ! 

Mark well, there is nothing non-essential in the Discipline 
— in the Bishop's Testament — not even a point, however 
small, all must be kept, but these ministers may teach that 
there are many positive commands in Christ's last will and 
testament which are non-essential and trivial, and can 1?j 
omitted or " amended with impunity ! ! !" 

" 12th Rule. Act in all things, not according to your oivn 
will, but as a son (i. e. our servant) in the gospel ! ! As such 
it is your duty to employ your time in the manner which 
WE direct in preaching and visiting from house to house, in 
reading, meditation and prayer. ABOVE ALL, (hear it, 
oh, ye heavens ! and be astonished ; oh, ye earth — hear it ! 
above preaching the gospel, reading God's word, obeying 
Christ or even prayer; yes, above all,) if you labor with us 
in the Lord's (Mr. Wesley's) vineyard, it is needful that you 



180 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

should do that part of the work which WE advise, at these 
times and places which WE judge most for his glory." 
Slavery — spiritual serfdom — what shall I say — I have no 
language in which to express my feelings. H words are 
nothing ! Were an angel from heaven to presume to impose 
such a law upon a mortal, he would be thrust down to hell 
in a moment — and for a mortal — a poor fallen mortal to de- 
mand service of his fellow ! ! 

If this is not a bold example and illustration of Anti- 
christ, and the pretensions and blasphemous assumptions of 
the " Man of Sin," opposing and exalting himself above all 
that is called God, or that is worshipped ; so that he, as 
God sitteth in the temple of God showing himself that he is 
God, the world has never yet beheld one ! 

Is not this an Antic hristian power, that makes implicit 
and servile obedience to its mandates, the first and most im- 
portant duty — the one above even the worship of God 
(prayer) and the reading or teaching his Word! — to heed 
and obey the will of man more than the will of God ! This 
is setting man above God ! 

Be assured, sir, it affords me no pleasure to write these 
things — to portray these awful, and to my mind, abomina- 
ble features of your system. I am painfully shocked as 
each unscriptural feature develops itself before me — as the 
system passes in review before my mind. 

My heart sickens at these sentiments — at the picture of 
spiritual bondage and degradation, enjoined and achieved by 
these chief ministers — these Methodist " principalities and 
powers," and all these unhallowed and impious pretensions 
claimed by the especial grace of God to their word ! I am 
sad and pained to think that professed Protestant minis- 
ters should, in the name of religion, assert such fearful Anti- 
christian authority and jurisdiction over their brethren. I 



REPUBLICANISM . BACKWARDS. 181 

am grieved to think that American Christians can be found 
blindly and servilely to bow down to such a degrading spi- 
ritual and temporal vassalage. I close each paragraph, as I 
do each letter, humbled with a sense of the weakness of 
human nature, with a fervent prayer that His light and truth 
may go forth until this darkness shall be illumined, and this 
blindness be dispelled — and priestcraft and spiritual wick- 
edness, that has enthroned itself in high places, and became 
proud and insolent with authority, may be overthrown, and 
all the friends of Christ be made to rejoice in the glorious 
liberty wherewith Christ makes us free. 



LETTER XVII. 



A Methodist Bishop the Pope of Protestantism — His over- 
whelming Despotic Powers. 

" How dare you suffer yourself to be called a Bishop." — Wesley. 

Sir : — Not until I had carefully examined the powers 
claimed and exercised by a Methodist Bishop did I under- 
stand the force of Wesley's question to the first Methodist 
who presumed to assume Episcopal authority : " How 
DARE you suffer yourself to be called a bishop V This 
language implies that there is an awful daring — a fearful 
presumption, in presuming to claim and exercise Episcopal 
functions. We may inquire, " In what does this daring con- 
sist?" Evidently in assuming the power of Antichrist 
over men — in men thrusting themselves in between God and 
man, between Christ and those who seek to be his followers, 
and claiming from them that reverence and obedience due to 
Christ alone. God created every man a sovereign — the 
equal and the equal only of his fellow. No one was created 
with a divine right to command him. Not even an angel 
had a right to dictate a command to him. No archangel 
would have dared, or would now dare to lay his behests 
upon man and exact obedience in the least particular. No one 
has a right to command man but God alone. Slavery, then, 

(182) 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 183 

is not an original condition. Had there been no sin, there 
would have been no slavery. God himself instituted it as a 
punishment upon the descendants of Ham. (And I grant he 
had a perfect right to do so. I have no war with God, I am 
to see that I o.ily do not bring down his curse upon my own 
head by abusing those enslaved.) He has also suffered it, 
more effectually to work out the gracious designs of his 
providence, as the slavery of Israel in Egypt, for 215 years. 

When God removes the curse from Ham, which will not 
be until every curse is abolished, the slavery of his race will 
cease, and not until then. 

But in the kingdom of grace there is no slavery allowed. 
No race, no class of men have a curse of servitude passed 
upon them. All are made free and equal in Christ Jesus ; 
all sovereigns and no masters. Jesus Christ has constituted 
himself '•''Head over all things to his church," and conse 
quently it is treason for any other head to claim to be over 
anything to the Church. Christ Jesus has taken the throne 
as the only King in Zion, consequently all the laws and 
rules, &c, of his kingdom must emanate from himself. If 
any other person or persons, or body of men, constitute 
themselves the Head of his Church, or claim to themselves 
the right to exercise the prerogative of the King alone — 
i. e. to legislate, enact and change laws, rules, rites and ordi- 
nances for Christ's Church, and prescribe duties to Christ's 
subjects, they evidently set themselves up in opposition to 
Christ; they are Antichrists to all intents and purposes, 
for they claim to exercise the prerogatives of Christ. 

The King and Lawgiver in Zion is jealous of his honor, 
and knowing the ambitious disposition of man, he was ex- 
plicit in his commands upon this subject — in forbidding his 
ministers to usurp his prerogatives in exercising authority 
over his followers, and his people to suffer or to submit to 



184 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

it. Hear him : "Ye know that they which are accounted 
to rule over the Gentiles, exercise lordship over them, and 
their great ones exercise authority upon them. But so shall 
it not be among you, but whosoever will be great among you, 
shall be your minister, and whosoever will be the chiefest, 
shall be servant (not the master or ruler) of all." In the 
Church of Christ there were to be no lords, or those who 
should exercise lordly authority upon their brethren — no great 
ones in authority and power. He expressly says there must not 
be. The humblest, the most laborious, was to be the great- 
est among them ; not great in power, but in love and honor. 
Hear him again. The Jewish Rabbi were teachers of the 
law and had, in the days of Christ, thrust themselves into 
Moses' seat — assumed the prerogative of Moses to make 
laws, and to lay their authoritative commands upon their 
brethren ; they were authoritative rulers of the people. 
" Be not ye called Rabbi : for one is your master even 
Christ, and all ye are brethren. And call no man your 
father, (of the same import with Rabbi and Master,) upon 
earth, for one is your father which is in heaven. Neither be 
ye called master, for one is your Master even Christ.* For 
he that is greatest among you shall be your servant." No 
language could be more definite than this. Authoritative 
power was not to be assumed. Even the title of Rabbi or 
Master, much less the power or authority, is positively for- 
bidden to be used or exercised. He alone is master, ruler, 
and lawgiver over his children. Does not this Scripture 

* This, in my humble opinion, forbids the conferring and receiving 
of flattering titles from one another, as "Doctor of Divinity." It is 
understood to be the acknowledgment of superiority, and the world 
looks, and the poor flattered D.D. is apt to look upon himself as some- 
thing above the generality of his brethren. It is pernicious in its ten- 
dency. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 185 

rebuke the impious arrogance of Popes, who style them- 
selves " Holy Fathers" and " Lord God the Pope T claim- 
ing both the title and the exercise of the power % Now, 
Bishop Soule, look candidly into the face of these Scriptures, 
and tell me — rather tell the world — how you DARE to be 
a bishop ! You exercise lordship over your brethren. You 
have most anxiously sought and gained the position of a 
"great one 11 in what you regard the Church of Christ, and 
you exercise authority upon your brethren. You imperi- 
ously dictate your commands to your brother ministers, 
whom you make your servants, and you have required of 
them to take a solemn oath and obey you reverently in all 
things, and above all things, thus absolving them from their 
obligations to obey God rather than man, and to consult his 
will and his glory in all things ; you require them solemnly, 
in the presence of God, of angels and men, to vow to obey 
"you as their chief minister, to whom is committed the care 
and government over them" to obey you, to have no mind, 
will, or judgment of their own — but to submit to your godly 
judgment. These ministers you send here and there as you 
will. Saying to one go, and he goeth, and to another come, 
and he cometh. Did Jesus Christ reduce his ministers to 
such a degrading vassalage as this ! Did he surrender them 
into the hands and power of man — or a set of men ? Did 
he appoint a despot a sovereign lord over them, to govern 
them, according to his lusts ? Did he intend for a lordly 
aristocrat to "lord it" over " his heritage" — his ministers 
and his people ? Did he even commit the direction of his 
ministers and the government of his church into the hands 
of an angel — of the highest arch-angel in the Universe 1 ! 
No, never. For that angel to presume to exercise the above 
powers, that you claim to exercise, even one item of them, 
to command a minister of Jesus Christ to obey him — to go 



186 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

and come as he commanded — would constitute that angel an 
arch- Antichrist. Bishop Soule, you are now an old man, 
with dimmed eyes, grey hairs, and trembling limbs. I beg 
of you before your last few sands have run, think of this 
question of your own great Wesley, " How DARE you to 
be a bishop V How dare you presume to exercise a pre- 
rogative that would cost the loftiest archangel around the 
throne his harp and diadem. Tell me, or rather tell your 
brethren, and the world, who committed unto you the care 
and absolute government and control of thousands of Christ's 
ministers, if you claim your preachers as Christian ministers 1 
Did God 1 Did the Saviour ? If so, where 1 Does he not for- 
bid it with the ample sanction of his authority ? Sir, I look 
upon your assumptions and the position you occupy with 
respect to Methodism, as I do upon the assumptions of the 
Pope of Rome, and the position he occupies with respect to 
the Church of Rome. What a daring to thrust yourself 
between Christ and his ministers and children — where no 
angel would dare to tread — and exercise your supreme 
lordship over them. 

I have said the authority of the bishop is supreme, and 
his power despotic. Every part of Methodism is contrived 
to give the bench of bishops an all-controlling, overwhelm- 
ing power over the whole system, to give it any direction 
they please, as much as the despotic Emperor of Russia has 
over the Greek Church, or over his own army. Cookman 
rightly calls the episcopacy the " great outer wheel" that puts 
and keeps in motion the whole machinery. 

Methodist bishops are elected, not by the people, but by 
the General Conference, composed of travelling preachers, as 
the pope is elected by the College of Cardinals. 

What are the powers of the bishops 1 We quote from 
the Discipline. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 187 

"What are the duties of bishops'?" 

A. To preside in our Conferences, (both annual and 
general.) 

1. " Who shall preside in the annual Conferences ?" A. 
" The bishops ; but in the absence of all the bishops, a pre- 
siding elder ; but in case there are two or more presiding 
elders belonging to one Conference, the bishop may by letter 
or otherwise, appoint the president." Page 31. 

.Now, of as little importance as this may appear to the 
unthinking, yet does it not show how carefully the bishops 
have provided for the supremacy of their authority in, and 
over the annual Conferences 1 No annual Conference has 
the right or power to select its own president ! If one of 
the bishops is not present, the next in command is to offici- 
ate, and the bishop by letter indicates the favorite elder, if 
there are two or more belonging to the body. Who is not 
apprised of the power of the president in and over, that body, 
especially when he has his authority to decide all questions 
of law and appoint every member of the Conference to 
whatever field of labor he pleases, and make whom he 
pleases presiding elder 1 His influence is all-prevailing, and 
all controlling. Every minister couches submissively at his 
feet, as a slave at the feet of his master, because his weal or 
woe, his elevation or debasement is in the sovereign will and 
word of his lord and master the bishop. Where can there 
be found an assembly alike subject to the one-man power, as 
an annual Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church 1 

But what are the powers of the bishop : 

2. " To fix the appointments of the preachers for the se- 
veral circuits, provided he shall not allow any preacher to 
remain in the same station more than two years successively ; 
except the presiding elders, the book agent, the editor and 
assistant editor of the Nashville Christian Advocate, and of 



188 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

the Southern Christian Advocate, the editor of the Richmond 
Christian Advocate, and the corresponding secretary of the 
Missionary Society, the supernumerary, superannuated, and 
worn-out preachers, missionaries among the Indians, mission- 
aries to our people of color, and on foreign stations, chaplains 
to state prisons and military posts, those preachers that may 
be appointed to labor for the special benefit of seamen, and 
for the American Bible Society, also the preacher or preach- 
ers that may be stationed in the city of New Orleans, and 
the presidents, principals, or teachers of seminaries of learn- 
ing, which are or maybe under our superintendence; and 
also, when requested by an annual Conference, to appoint a 
preacher for a longer time than two years to any seminary 
of learning not under our care : provided, also, that with the 
exceptions above named, he shall not continue a preacher in 
the same appointment more than two years in six ; nor in 
the same city more than four years in succession ; nor re- 
turn him to it after such term of service till he shall have 
been absent four years. He shall have authority, when re- 
quested by an annual Conference, to appoint an agent, whose 
duty it shall be to travel throughout the bounds of such Con- 
ference for the purpose of establishing and aiding Sabbath- 
schools, and distributing tracts, and also to appoint an agent 
or agents, for the benefit of our literary institutions. 

3. " In the intervals of the Conferences, to change, receive, 
and suspend preachers, as necessity may require, and as the 
Discipline directs. 

4. " To travel through the connection at large. 

5. "To oversee the spiritual and temporal business of 
our Church. 

6. "To ordain bishops, elders, and deacons. 

7. " To decide all questions of law in an annual Confer- 
ence, subject to an appeal to the General Conference ; but 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 189 

in all cases the application of law shall be with the con- 
ference. 

8. " The bishops may, when they judge it necessary, unite 
two or more circuits or stations together, without affecting 
their separate financial interests, or pastoral duties. 

9. " It shall be the duty of the bishop, presiding in any an- 
nual Conference, to hear and decide appeals of the quarterly 
meeting Conferences, on questions of law. 

. 10. " It shall be the duty of the bishop to choose the pre- 
siding elders, to fix their stations, and to change them when 
he judges it necessary. 

11. "The bishop may allow an elder to preside in the 
same district for any term not exceeding four years suc- 
cessively ; after which he shall not be appointed to the same 
district for six years. 

12. " The bishop shall appoint the times of holding the 
annual Conferences ; but they shall allow each Conference to 
sit a week at least. 

13. "it shall be the duty of the bishops to point out a 
course of reading and study proper to be pursued by candi- 
dates for the ministry, for the term of four years, from the 
time of their admission into Conference on trial. 

14. " It shall be the duty of the bishops to see that the 
districts are formed according to their judgment, provided 
that no district shall contain more than fourteen appoint- 
ments. 

" In case there be no bishop to travel through the districts 
and exercise the episcopal office, on account of death or 
otherwise, the districts shall be regulated in every respect 
by the annual Conferences, and the presiding elders, in the 
interval of General Conference, ordination only excepted." 

Can a more perfect centralization of power in the hands 
of one man be conceived of-— and that man responsible to 



190 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

no one for the use of his authority ! He elevates and de- 
grades whom he pleases, and no one on earth has the right 
to say " why doest thou so ?" 

1. He decides all questions of law, puts his own construc- 
tion upon the Discipline. 

2. It is his prerogative to exercise unlimited control and 
supreme jurisdiction over the thousand travelling preach- 
ers, appointing them to whatever posts, offices, stations or 
circuits he pleases, in a word, command them to do what- 
ever he pleases, and when he pleases, and where he pleases. 
The bishop has only his own sovereign pleasure to consult. 
The welfare of every minister hangs upon the point of the 
bishop's pen. He can give a minister a good appointment 
or an indifferent one, as he pleases. He allows no preacher 
to petition for a certain station. He is to have no mind or 
will of his own, but in all things submit himself blindly 
to the godly judgment of his chief ministers, who have the 
control of him. The bishop knows well how to teach his 
servants passive obedience to his episcopal rod. If he learns 
of one becoming dissatisfied with an indifferent appointment 
one year, he can punish him by giving him one ten fold worse 
the next. If he discovers one whom the yoke of clerical 
domination galls, who is becoming restive under the lash, 
and is republican in his religious views, the bishop can resort 
to one of two effective remedies — either to humble him, 
crush his spirit out of him by keeping him in the mountains 
and swamps, until he gives in ; or bribe his obedience with 
preferment. Give him a presiding eldership, or give him fat 
stations in towns and cities. See that some Methodist col- 
lege confer a doctorate upon him, promise him the presi- 
dency of some college, — or a bishopric, may be the shining 
goal that is held out to him in the end. How many have 
been kept from the paths of reform, whose feet had well 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 191 

nigh slipped from the support of the episcopacy ? The 
world has abundant reason to believe that the temptation of 
preferment prevailed over the principles of a McKendree, of 
a Waugh, of an Emory, and alas, alas ! over the lamented 
Bascom. Did not all these men sympathize deeply with 
the reformers — did they not, one and all bear their testi- 
mony against the dangerous power and despotism of the 
episcopacy, and were they not made D. D.'s and bishops 
subsequently 1* 

But the weal or wo of every station, or society, is made 
to hang upon the bishop's smile or frown. He claims 
the divine right to select the "minister for each station, cir- 
cuit or chapel throughout the wide domain of Methodism. 
He sends whom he pleases. He allows no society to indi- 
cate whom it would have, or to express the slightest wish 
about it. Each society must accept and support whomso- 
ever its lord the bishop appoints ! If any society has in- 
curred the displeasure of his highness, by having been so 
indiscreet as to have asked for the reappointment of some 
favorite preacher, or may not have contributed money as 
liberally as he wished, or may chance entertain too liberal 
views, the bishop can scourge it into repentance, by sending 
to it a succession of unacceptable and inefficient preachers, 
or some tyrant to oppress, and if that society prove refrac- 
tory still, he can turn the key and shut up the meeting- 
house against them — a house they have built with their own 
money, and leave them without a preacher. They are thus 
virtually under ban of excommunication and dispossessed, 
and the only alternative left them is to repent and submit, 

* Read again Bascom's mature and honest opinion of Methodism, 
in the quotations I have given, and above all read his inimitable De- 
claration of Rights, published by the Tennessee Publication So- 
ciety. 



192 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

or revolt, leaving their possessions in the bishop's hands ! Is 
not this despotic power % Is it not the pow er of the Pope, to 
all intents and purposes 1 

But every preferment is in the gift of the bishop. It is his 
prerogative to appoint presiding elders — to make and un- 
make them at his pleasure, and the under ministers, the 
laborers, must receive and obey them, and the circuits must 
support them, however tyrannical, inefficient, or unaccept- 
able they may be ; and these under-lordlings can exercise 
the same authority as the bishops, upon the preachers. 

" It shall be the duty of the bishops to choose the presid- 
ing elders, to fix their stations, and to change them when 
they judge it necessary." Page 33. Rev. J. S. Inskip, a 
Methodist author, says : 

Page 146. " The presiding elders are chosen by the 
bishops ; and, however unacceptable the persons thus chosen 
may be to those whose situation in life and ministerial labors 
they appoint and direct, they have no authority to displace 
them." Their official action may be altogether erroneous 
and unsatisfactory ; they may be chargeable with the most 
flagrant and oppressive favoritism; and yet the parties 
oppressed have no power to remove them from office." 

3. The bishops have every press in all Methodism under 
their control, as much as Pio Nono, or any absolute monarch 
in Europe. They appoint the editors, and change them at 
their pleasure. What are Methodist editors but the servants 
and tools of the bishops % Who can respect them as inde- 
pendent journalists 1 Who can tell when they write their own 
conscientious sentiments or according to the will of their 
masters? Where, under such Episcopal surveillance and 
jurisdiction, is the freedom of the press, in the dominion of 
Methodism 1 But we leave this now for future consideration. 

4. The bishops appoint all the teachers of their schools. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 193 

All their schools, then, are under their patronage and 
control. 

5. All the travelling agents are under their appointment 
and control. 

6. All the missionaries in home or foreign stations. 

7. They claim the right to control the spiritual and tem- 
poral business of the Church ! The Pope of Rome claims 
no more power — he could not ! 

8. The bishop marks out the course of instruction, the 
reading and the study of all the ministers, and thus can 
mould them to his sovereign will and pleasure ! 

Thus can we see how your whole system is construed — to 
make all your ministers agents, editors, teachers, etc. ; and 
every part of the system subservient to the bishops — and 
how it makes it for the interest of all the above to please 
and to be popular with the bishops! Whom will you 
appoint for presiding elders — and who for editors — who for 
presidents and teachers of your schools — to all the places of 
power and fat salaries % Whom, sir — whom but your spe- 
cial favorites — those most popular with you — those most 
pliant, subservient and willing to sell their consciences and 
religious principles, if any they have, to uphold Episcopacy, 
and the power, authority and administration of the bishop ! 
All your preachers, editors, schools, agents, missionaries, 
etc., are your creatures, and, therefore, it is their interests, 
everywhere, to raise the shout, " God save the bishop ! — 
long live the Episcopacy ! 1" No wonder there is such an 
outcry — no wonder the very heavens are rent from river to 
gulf by so many thousands of placemen and place-seeking 
men, when an article is published or a sermon preached, in 
which the all-controlling authority and vicegerency of Meth- 
odist bishops are questioned, denied or repudiated by a 
Baptist editor or faithful preacher. Where there is one such 
9 



194 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

sermon preached, or one such article written, there should be 
a thousand, and there shortly will be, thank God ; the day is 
coming, and now is, when spiritual potentates, rulers and 
hierarchies will be called unto judgment by an outraged and 
indignant people. They will demand of you, " Who made 
you judge and ruler over us? Who committed us to your 
care, and absolute, despotic and degrading government 1 
and you will be bound to answer, or flee the rocking throne 
of your episcopal jurisdiction. 

The time is coming, too, when an American citizen, a 
republican Christian, will feel himself insulted to be invited 
to enter one of your societies, and voluntarily concede his 
invaluable and indefeasible rights as a man and a freeman, 
freely put off Christ, his Testament and his laws, and allow 
you to weld your collar around his neck, and vow alliance to 
your Discipline, as above the word of God. And may God 
hasten the time when the yoke of your vassalage shall be 
broken, and your ghostly scepter turned to ashes, and your 
statute-book be trampled with indignation beneath every 
Christian foot, and Christ alone be King. 



LETTER XVIII. 



Methodist Presiding Elders — Sub-Bishops — their Irrespon- 
sible and Oppressive Powers. 

They that are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them. 

Christ. 

Sir : — Having shown in my last your daring assumption 
in presuming to exercise the powers and authority you do, 
as bishop over your brethren — (assumptions so impious and 
daring that your own Wesley said, in denouncing the first 
Methodist bishop, " How can you, how dare you suffer your- 
self to be called a bishop 1 I shudder, I start, at the very 
thought ! ! ") I will now notice your Second or Aid — the 
officer next to you in authority, and the oppressive and 
tyrannical powers you delegate to him. 

The presiding elder is a servant of the bishop — he pecu- 
liarly belongs to his bishop as no other minister does. He 
is chosen solely by the bishop — holds his office during the 
pleasure of his master — can be dismissed at his master's 
pleasure, for no reason except the royal pleasure of his lord- 
ship, and his business is, not to preach — to serve God — by no 
means — that is not reckoned among his duties, but to serve 
the bishop in the character of a sub-overseer, as a spy and 
informant upon his brethren, and he is, for this exalted service, 
allowed to share in the authority of his master during the 
recess of Conference, and to be judged in the Quarterly 
Courts of Appeals. This officer, from the very nature of his 

(195) 



196 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

office and work, is the most irresponsible character, in our 
estimation, of any in the whole society. The presiding elder 
is, of course, selected as one of the most pliant tools that 
can be found among all the ministers — one that has the least 
principle and the least sense of honor or shame, or he would 
scorn to become the sweep, the very serf of the bishop, or of 
any man — scorn to become the spy and informant upon his 
brethren in the ministry — scorn to exercise the mastery over 
them, so hostile to the express letter and the very spirit of 
the Gospel. He is accounted to rule over the Gentiles of his 
district, and like the under rulers to whom our Lord referred 
in the text, he exercises an insolent and oppressive lordship 
over the preachers under him, as every circuit-rider can tes- 
tify, if he happens not to be as pliant and couching as his 
mighty lordship, the elder, desires. 

I am aware that it becomes me to prove this. I have said 
that the presiding elder is the sole creature and servant of 
man — the bishop, depending upon him alone for his appoint- 
ment and continuance in office, and is responsible to the 
bishop alone for his official conduct. 

Proof : — " It shall be the duty of the bishop to choose the 
presiding elders, to fix their stations, and to change them 
when he judges it necessary" — Discipline, p. 38. No one is 
permitted to nominate the candidate — nor when elected can 
all the preachers in the Conference control his acts, or sus- 
pend him from the exercise of his office for any crime ! To 
his own master, the bishop, he standeth or falleth. He can 
be dismissed at the bishop's pleasure, for no crime, for no I 
fault, and that without any reasons being given, nor has he 
the right to ask a reason. " Suspension, removal, or deposi- 
tion from office in the Methodist E. Church is summary" [i. e. 
despotic !] without accusation, trial, or formal sentence. " It 
is for no crime, generally for no misdemeanor, but for being 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 197 

unacceptable." " Most of the removals are by a sole agent, 
namely, by a bishop, a preacher whose will is omnipotent in 
the premises." " The removing officer is not legally obliged 
to assign any cause for deposition." " The deposed has no 
appeal, if indiscreetly or unnecessarily removed, he must sub- 
mit." — Bishop Hamline's Speech in Conference of 1844. 

I am compelled to ask you here, sir, did Jesus Christ ever 
clothe his ministers with such "summary" and tyrannical 
powers over their brethren 1 What right then have you, sir, 
to remove an elder from an office to which the Lord Jesus 
has called him ? What is the question you ask him ? " Do 
you think in your heart that you are truly called, according 
to the will of our Lord Jesus Christ to the order of elders 1 " 
He answers, " I think so." Your presiding elders, of course, 
feel that they have an equal calling ; and, if so, how dare you 
recall and depose from office one whom the Lord hath called 
— and depose from an office which the Lord hath imposed 
upon him % How, sir, but by assuming to exercise the powers 
superior to the King of Zion 1 But I can see how r you meet 
this. "The office of presiding elder is one of my own crea- 
tion, and the presiding .elder is a creation of my own will. 
Jesus Christ has nothing to do with him — he belongs to me 
— Christ nor the Holy Ghost has any thing to do with calling 
him. / call him" — The bishops call their presiding elders, 
and can consequently recall them. They are self-denying 
servants. They freely deny themselves the honor of saying 
with Peter, " Peter, servant and apostle of Jesus Christ — 
called of God ;" or with Paul, " Paul an apostle {not of men), 
neither [called and sent] by a man, but by Jesus Christ," 
that they may say, " John B. M'Ferrin, servant and apostle 
of my bishop, called and sent to be a presiding elder (or an 
editor), not of God, neither by Jesus Christ, but the will of 
my Lord Bishop ." ! ! 



198 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

Do I say too. much when I say that the presiding elder is 
not a preacher — is not sent to preach, and that the bishop does 
not mention preaching in his commission as one of his duties 1 
Here is his commission — here the lordly powers and ruling 
privileges granted to him under the bishop, for the voluntary 
prostitution of himself, conscience, and service, soul and body 
to man-service. It makes it his business to rule, to be judge 
of all the " Quarterly Courts of Appeals " in his district ; 
and to be spy and informer upon the preachers of his dis- 
trict ! What an honorable calling, truly ! He is the bishop's 
agent. Read his commission. See Dis. p. 39, sec. vi. : 

" Of the Presiding Elders, and their Duty. 

Q. " 1. What are the duties of a presiding elder ? 

A. " 1. To travel through his appointed district. 

" 2. In the absence of the bishop to take charge of all the 
elders and deacons, travelling and local preacher, and ex- 
horters, in his district. 

" 3. To change, receive, and suspend preachers in his dis- 
trict during the intervals of the Conferences, and in the 
absence of the bishop, as the Discipline directs. [What an 
irresponsible and high-handed power ! No wonder the elder 
is such an important personage in the eyes of the itinerants !] 

" 4. To be present, as far as practicable, at all the quar- 
terly meetings, and call together the members of the quar- 
terly Conference, over which he shall also preside. 

" 5. To oversee the spiritual and temporal business of the 
Church in his district, and to promote, by all proper means, 
the cause of missions and Sunday-schools, and the publica- 
tion at our own press, of Bibles, tracts, and Sunday-school 
books ; and carefully to inquire at each quarterly meeting 
Conference, whether the rules respecting the instruction of 
children have been faithfully observed ; and to report to the 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 199 

annual Conference the names of all travelling preachers within 
his district, who shall neglect to observe these rules. 

" 6. To take care that every part of our Discipline be en- 
forced in his district. And to decide all questions of law in 
a quarterly meeting Conference, subject to an appeal to the 
president of the next annual Conference ; but in all cases the 
application of law shall be with the Conference. 

"7. To attend the bishops when present in his district; 
and to give them when absent, all necessary information, by 
letter, of the state of his district. 

"8. To direct the candidates for the ministry to those 
studies recommended for them by the bishops. 

"9. If any preacher absent himself from his circuit, the 
presiding elder shall, as far as possible, fill his place with 
another preacher. 

" Q. 2. Shall the presiding elder have power to employ 
a preacher who has been rejected at the previous annual Con- 
ference % 

" A. He shall not, unless the Conference should give him 
liberty under certain conditions." 

I have been careful to give the whole section, and there is 
not one word about preaching — that is a secondary matter. 
If you make it the duty of your presiding elders to preach in 
the Discipline, I have not been able to find it, and would be 
obliged to you for a reference to the page. He has but two 
classes of duties. To obey his bishop is the first, and to rule 
and watch his brethren— his equals and superiors, in true 
merit and self-denying labors, the second ! 

Some may think that I seek to turn the Quarterly Con- 
ferences into derision, by calling them " quarterly Courts of 
Appeal," and the presiding elder "Judge of Appeals," for 
our brethren who are uninitiated are very exact to dismiss 
their religious meetings when these Methodist Courts hold 



200 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

their sessions in their neighborhood ! ! I would not be so 
understood. I have called them by their true name, and in 
this I am not alone. Tnskip says of the presiding elder, 
u He has charge of the administration of the discipline 
throughout the district. He is to take care that every part 
of our discipline be enforced. He is to preside at the trials 
of local preachers, and in the Court of Appeals." P. 140. 
Again, " He comes as adviser, or Judge of Appeals." 
P. 142. If my language is irreverent, so is that of one of 
your own standard authors. 

I have said that he was not only a judge over, but a spy 
and informant upon his brethren — a double office thathonor-. 
able and high-minded men would scorn to fulfil. For proof, 
I refer to the 7th rule of his duties ; also to the authority of 
Mr. Inskip. " They (the presiding elders) are also required 
to give all the information they can, by letter or otherwise, 
to the bishop, concerning the state of the work in the terri- 
tory committed to their supervision and care." " By con- 
stantly travelling through his district, and having frequent 
and confidential intercourse, (how admirably adapted to 
encourage tattlers, and for enemies to report scandal !) with 
the ministry and membership of the church, he is prepared 
to inform the bishops of the talents and usefulness of the 
former (ministers) and the wants and preferences of the 
latter." P. 139. What a Jesuitical system of espionage 
truly is this ! Every despotism on earth has its system of 
espionage, supported at great cost. Russia pays annually 
millions, and it costs Methodism in America an immense sum 
for its host of presiding elders ! ! 

" By keeping a watchful eye over all the travelling and 
local preachers in the district." P. 141. The ministers of 
Jesus Christ have no one to watch them but their Master, 
while the ministers and servants of men have men set over 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 201 

them to watch and keep a spying eye upon them ! What a 
degrading vassalage ! " It is known that the presiding 
elders are placed in the position they now occupy, to give 
the necessary information to the bishops in making out the 
appointments." "The whole question of our appointments 
is left under the conjoint direction of the bishops and pre- 
siding elders." P. 149. 

Thus we see the travelling preacher, the worker, has two 
masters to please, and the most exacting one is the infe- 
rior. Unless he is a couching sycophant at the feet of his 
presiding elder, he stands no chance for a good appointment 
with the bishop. There is no alternative left him — please 
his lord, the presiding elder, or be kept in the swamps and 
the mountains. The world, from a knowledge of this pecu- 
liar wheel in the system, may know how to account for the 
peculiar obliquities of some Methodist ministers who are 
considered as upright men. They are not their own masters, 
but are bound to pursue the course, and reflect the senti- 
ments indicated by their immediate masters, the presiding 
elders. I confess to you, sir, I cannot see how either a 
high minded or God-fearing man can submit to be a Meth- 
odist minister, since any one having any self-respect would 
scorn, and a man who feared God would not dare to become 
the slave to serve two masters, and they men in nothing supe- 
rior to themselves ! 

I have said the presiding eldership is invested with irrespon- 
sible and oppressive powers. Inskip says, p. 146, " The pre- 
siding elders are chosen by the bishops. And, however un- 
acceptable, the persons thus chosen, may be, to those whose 
situation in life and ministerial labors they appoint and 
direct, they have no authority to displace them. Their 
official action may be altogether erroneous and unsatisfac- 
tory ; they may be chargeable with the most flagrant and 



202 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

oppressive favoritism ; and yet the parties oppressed, have 
no power to remove them from office," nor any right pro- 
vided even to petition to the bishop for their removal, any 
more than the slaves in the cotton field have a right to dic- 
tate who shall be their overseer, or to remove a cruel one ! 
Says Inskip, p. 157, "He may be as an officer, unacceptable 
in the highest degree ; he may be tyranical, overbearing, 
and inefficient beyond endurance, and still be secure in 
his office ! His brethren, who know him and labor with him, 
may reprove and censure (if they dare /) but they cannot 
displace him." Nor can they complain to the bishops except 
at the hazard of their displeasure. Our author confesses 
" there is no method by which we can communicate with 
them on this subject, without seeming to be uncharitable or 
insubordinate. In other words, there is no constitutional 
provision by which we can make our grievances known. In 
this matter, we have nothing to do but to endure and 

OBEY." P. 157* 

And yet to such irresponsible officers, what an all-control- 



* To show how little regard a bishop will pay to the wishes of a 
whole conference, we give one example from Inskip's work, p. 157. 

" It is true, we may, by a vote of an annual Conference, make a 
general request of the bishops, as was done a few years since by one of 
the Western Conferences. * * But what can we accomplish by 
these things? The result may easily be foreseen. In one of our 
annual Conferences, the name of which it is not necessary to mention, 
a resolution was passed, requesting the bishops not to appoint the 
same persons to the office of a presiding elder for more than one term, 
etc. The design of this was to remove from the office, individuals who 
had been in it so long, as to produce serious dissatisfaction. The issue 
of the matter was, the ensuing General Conference declared all such 
resolutions null and void. And this could not have been otherwise in 
view of the constitution. The resolution referred to, was too general, 
and not sufficiently specific. And, furthermore, as already stated, it 
was imconstitutional, hence null and void." 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS, 203 

ling power over the travelling preachers is delegated ! The 
presiding elder shtp constitute the bishop's Cabinet! ! 

" The presiding elders of an annual Conference bring for- 
ward all candidates for admission into the travelling con- 
nection, and for deacon's or elder's orders. They constitute 
what is designated the bishop's cabinet ; and frequently direct 
or control the entire business of the Conference. P. 144. 

" That they may be correctly informed, and act under- 
standingly, and distribute the workmen so as to make the 
best use of their talents, the bishops must be in communica- 
tion with the elders. And this communication, of course, 
should be strictly confidential. The bishops know to but a 
limited extent either the talents and qualifications of the 
men to be stationed, or the wants and condition of the places 
to which they are to be appointed. It is hence apparent, 
from the circumstances and necessity of the case, the office is 
very little inferior to the Episcopacy itself. P. 145. 

" From various causes, and in a manner not necessary to 
mention here, the presiding eldership has, in a great measure, 
become the appointing power of the Church." 

What must be the natural workings of such irresponsible 
power, but to foster favoritism and oppression 1 Let Inskip 
testify, pp. 143, 144 — also pp. 150, 151, and 152. 

" It may be esteemed treasonable and hazardous to inti- 
mate any thing of the kind ; but it is true we have imbibed 
the idea, that the presiding eldership, is an instrument by 
which a system of favoritism is fostered, and crafty and im- 
proper influences are brought to bear upon the stationing 
authorities of the church. That such views are frequently 
unfounded suspicions, and without any warrant from the facts 
in the case, will be cheerfully admitted." 

"Still, the controlling influence the elders exert, has a 
tendency to excite the jealousy of their brethren, who, in 



204 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL, 

the present state of things, often seem to have but little to 
do at an annual Conference, save to receive their appoint- 
ments." 

The irresponsibility of the presiding eldership, is fraught 
with the most dangerous tendencies ; and is contrary to 
our economy and usage in all other respects." 

If Inskip may presume to say this, what may I not pre- 
sume to say ? I will say, that if he is correct, then the 
presiding eldership is not an office of church appointment. 
I will say it is an office that, exerts a debasing and degrading 
influence upon the itinerant preachers. " But the custom of 
which we speak is so much opposed to what may be called 
Methodistic propriety, and so entirely at variance with the 
general spirit of our institutions, that it seems to us, we use 
the mildest terms that can be employed in alluding to it ; 
and say the least we can in pronouncing it, pernicious, 
We refer to the fact of the presiding elders, at the close of 
their official term, nominating their successors. That the 
bishops are shut up to the necessity of regarding, or are, in 
the proper sense of the term, bound by such a nomination, 
we do not pretend to say. But that they generally make 
the appointment in this manner, is a fact of common noto- 
riety." 

"And again, the presiding elders, it is known, are all in 
council with the bishops in reference to their own appoint- 
ments, as well as those of others. This gives them undue 
and improper advantage over their brethren. They have an 
opportunity of influencing the minds of the bishops that all 
do not enjoy. This circumstance has frequently produced 
serious and well-founded complaints." 

There is a growing opposition to this office — -to this sys- 
tem of espionage among Methodists. See Inskip, p. 143. 

" Nevertheless, we cannot but perceive, that the office is 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 206 

by no means of as good report among us, as in times gone 
by. Its utility is becoming a question of serious doubt with 
many." 

" It has been proposed to remedy all the difficulties by 
abolishing the office altogether." 

These are some of the objections urged by your own au- 
thors. But, sir, I object to the office and its powers, for 
reasons infinitely superior to all these. It is unscriptural, 
and contrary to the spirit of our holy religion. I need not 
waste ink in proving that the Scriptures do not warrant such 
an officer. Wesley, converted by the writings of Lord King, 
declares, and all your standard authors unequivocally de- 
clare, that there are but two orders of ministers recognized 
in the New Testament — deacons and elders. Where, then, is 
your authority for two other orders of ministers — rather 
officials — that do not preach, i. e. presiding elders and bishops'? 
If you say that the presiding eldership is not an order, 
only an office, by what authority do you recall a minister 
from a work to which he solemnly declared, at his ordination, 
he regarded the Lord Jesus had called him to serve under 
you in ruling and judging alone 1 There is no more autho- 
rity in the Bible for such an officer as a presiding elder than 
for such an order or office as that you presume to occupy. 
Which one of his apostles or disciples did the Saviour autho- 
rize to take charge of all the elders and deacons, travelling 
and local preachers and exhorters, in a certain district 1 ? 
Which one of the apostles presumed to dare to exercise the 
power of a Methodist presiding elder, much less those of a 
bishop, over even one of the other apostles, or the humblest 
preacher, deacon, or private member of the church? Did 
Paul, or Peter, aspire to such a preeminence'? Never. It 
would have cost either of them his soul to have assumed 
such Antichristian powers ! Did not the Saviour mos* pes* 



206 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

tively and peremptorily forbid any one of his disciples to 
assume the mastery over his brethren, and as positively 
command His disciples not to recognize such claims ? That 
he alone was their Master, their King, their Lawgiver, and 
they were to serve and obey none but him 1 And yet, sir, 
you declared at your ordination that you felt truly called to 
the ministration of the office of a Methodist Bishop, accord- 
ing to the will of our Lord Jesus Christ. Has our Lord 
Jesus changed his mind since he left the world, or how dare 
you, who exercise lordship over your brethren, declare that 
you are inspired or called, or in anywise authorized to do so 
by the will of the King of Zion ! I solemnly charge you, 
Bishop Soule, in common with your colleagues in the Epis- 
copacy, with the assumption and exercise of impious and 
^4^^'christian powers, in presuming to lay your authoritative 
commands upon your brethren, and in creating the office of 
presiding elder, and imposing his irresponsible and oppres- 
sive jurisdiction upon those whose right and duty it is to 
enjoy the glorious liberty and freedom, wherewith Christ 
makes his people free. Christ never instituted a spy judge 
over his followers, and they should forever scorn to acknow- 
ledge or submit to one. 



LETTER XIX. 



The Travelling Preacher — the allegiance required — the duties 
imposed — the servants of servants — yet in their turns al- 
lowed to exercise great authority over the rights of the laity 
— the class leaders and 4th wheel or stirrers — stewards — An 
important question, " Do not the clergy, the rulers of Me- 
thodism belong to a Church by themselves, the Annual 
Conferences, or Preacher's Church into which no layman 
can enter? — a Church within a Church! ! 

Dear Sir : — In examining the machinery of your system, 
one can but acknowledge the admirably adaptedness of the 
various parts to accomplish the end designed — a tremendous 
consolidation, and the most arbitrary and irresponsible epis- 
copal control. The society of the Jesuits has been compared 
to a sword, the handle of which is at Rome, and the point 
everywhere. I can only compare the polity of your society 
to an immense screw, the lever of which is in the hands of 
the bishops, and the controlling, crushing power is felt upon, 
and through every part of it. No civil despotism was ever 
more powerful and efficient — efficient because despotic! 
Having examined the powers of the Episcopacy, and the 
Bishop's Cabinet, i. e., the presiding elders, I proceed to no- 
tice tlvs relative position of the workers — the travelling 

(307) 



208 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

preachers — and note the wheel that drives them, and the 
wheels they move in their revolutions. 

The following are the degrees through which a candidate 
for the Preacher's Church, — " full connection" with the 
annual Conference, must pass. 

1. He must obtain the privilege from his society, or class 
meeting to exhort. This is of easy accomplishment. And 
mark it, this is the only instance, in the life of a Methodist 
preacher, when his name comes before the laity. They are 
simply allowed to permit him to exhort, but this act is not 
saying that he may be a preacher, or their ruler the balance 
of his life. It is also claimed by Methodist preachers, that 
they are the representatives of the laity, their duly elected 
representatives. When % When the laity merely allowed 
them to exhort, nothing more. Why, sir, to exhort is the 
inalienable right of every Christian without a license from 
the brethren ! But who ever heard of representatives who 
held their office for life, and were not amenable to their 
constituents — the people 1 ? They are such representatives as 
kings and popes are. Having obtained his recommend to 
exhort, he supplies himself with Wesley's sermons, and, if 
he has a good memory, and strong lungs, he shortly becomes 
a right sharp preacher, and is quite an important actor in 
camp meetings, and especially " in the altar." 

His next step is to obtain a recommendation from the 
Quarterly Court Conference. If he is on good terms with 
his preacher, and his honor, the judge of the court, (i. e., the 
presiding elder,) this is more than willingly granted. He 
remains under the jurisdiction of this quarterly body, until 
he obtains a recommendation from it to the Annual Court, 
as a suitable person for deacon's orders. This being done, 
he is examined, and if accepted he is allowed to enter upon 
a two years' trial, after having taken the following oath. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 209 

The bishop asks : 

" Will you reverently obey them to whom the charge and 
government over you is committed, following with glad mind 
and will their GODLY admonitions ? 

Ans. " / will endeavor to do so, the Lord being my helper" 
There are thousands of pious ministers, who would suffer 
imprisonment and death at the stake, before they would take 
the above oath, admitting as it does that there are any spiri- 
tual rulers over them, to whom the charge and government 
of them has been committed by the Saviour, and pledging 
supreme and reverential obedience, due to God only ! 

The candidate now enters upon his second probation, which 
must continue two years, before he is allowed to join Confer- 
ence in full connection, in order to give full proof of his de- 
votion to the discipline and his allegiance and obedience to 
his spiritual lords and masters. He must learn to be ruled 
before he is allowed to rule others. This training of two 
years is important to render the young neophyte perfectly 
plastic and tractable, and properly to break him into the 
harness, and accustom him to the bit and collar. If he proves 
to have too much spirit to crouch under human dictation, and 
possessed of too much republican and Christian democracy 
to be made a slave of in the church, the home of Christ's 
freemen, who acknowledge and call no man their master, he 
can be rejected as a crooked stick, or as a Methodist writer 
justly says, " a good enough Christian but unfit for a Me- 
thodist/ See Bond, p. 20. 

But if he submits with a glad mind and will, and rever- 
ently obeys during his two years of probation, he is brought 
! forward again for examination^for admission. 

This is made solemn and awful, to make a deep and last- 
ing impression upon his mind. 

The examination is preceded by fasting and prayer. A 



210 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

lengthy examination and catechising them commences. We 
have not space for all the questions. The burden of the 
whole is to pledge him to teach and enforce every point in 
the discipline, and above everything required in a Methodist 
preacher, to obey his clerical masters. We hear young 
ministers say now-a-days, that a great part — or some parts of 
the discipline are inoperative ; and not required of them, nor 
by them. Now, sir, I mistrust the honesty of every minis- 
ter who says this, and I affirm that he asserts what he ktiows 
to be false ! If he fails or refuses to execute strictly every 
"point" of the discipline, he is a perjured man; he violates 
his solemn oath and sacred pledges, before God and men. 
If he changes or " mends" the rules, he does the same. 

With these remarks let us notice some of the pledges re- 
quired in his examination. 

" Do you know the rules of society — of the Bands ? Do 
you keep them ? Have you read the form of discipline ? 
Are you willing to conform to it 1 Have you considered the 
rules of a preacher, especially the 1st, 10th, and 12th? Will 
you keep them for conscience sake?" Let us see what these 
so especial rules are. 

Rule 1. "Be diligent. Never be unemployed ; never be 
triflingly employed," &c, &c, all very good. 

Rule 4. " Take no step towards marriage without first 
consulting your brethren ;" those to whom are committed 
the care and government over him of course. I would 
sooner send a young man to consult his mother, than to 
all the bishops and presiding elders in Methodistdom. But 
this is rule 4. 

Rule 10. "Be punctual. «Do everything exactly at the 
time. And do not mend our rules, but keep them ; not for 
wrath but conscience sake.'''' 

Rule 11. * * last cause. 'And remember ! — a Methodist 



republicanism: backwards. 211 

preacher is to mind every point great and small, in the 
Methodist Discipline ! " Therefore you will need all the 
sense (?!) and grace you have." Does this look like any 
part of the Discipline is inoperative or obsolete *? 

Rule 12. " Act in ALL things, not according to your 
own will, but as a Son in the Gospel." The son must obey 
his father in all things, but how many fathers have these 
Methodist's Sons — the bishops and presiding elders ; but 
Christ says call no man father — papa. " As such it is your 
DUTY. [I sin when I neglect my duty, do preachers Sin 
when they violate some little part of the injunctions of their 
fathers 1 !] to employ your time in the manner which WE 
direct ; in preaching and visiting from house to house ; in 
reading, meditation and prayer. ABOVE ALL, [all what? 
reading the Bible or prayer to God for his guidance and will 
to act for his glory.] Above all : if you labor with us in 
Lord's vineyard, it is needful you should do that part of the 
work which WE advise, at THOSE TIMES AND PLACES 
which WE judge most for. his glory V Does not the 
above absolve the Methodist preacher from his allegiance to 
Jesus Christ, from all concern to learn the will of Christ 
concerning him, and all concern about so living, and acting 
as he himself judges for the glory of his God 1 Do not his 
masters take all the above concern off his conscience, and 
take the absolute direction of him and his conscience into 
their own keeping % If he should be asked in the judgment, 
" why have you not labored where I by my providence 
have directed, and with an eye single to my glory V What 
could the poor Methodist preacher answer, but, " Lord, I 
was taught that was not my business to consult thy will or 
consider where thou didst call me to labor, or what I might 
regard as promotive of thy glory, but the Bishops and Pre- 
siding Elders whom I served, taught me to form no mind 



212 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

or will o: my own and above all reading and praying; to 
obey them, and to labor where and do what they should 
judge most for thy glory ! !" And do those who plead these 
things and thus yield themselves up to serve men, consider 
themselves the servants of Christ ? ! ! ! 

After a sufficient examination and the candidate is fully 
pledged and committed to his chief rulers, he is required to 
seal his promises with a solemn oath ; which we consider 
equal in stringency and impiety to that taken by any Roman 
Catholic priest, or Jesuit to the general of his order. 

Tt is demanded of him in the name of God and his Church. 
See Dis. p. 136-138. 

The Bishop asks — " Will you reverently obey your chief 
Ministers, unto whom is committed the charge and govern- 
ment over you ; following with glad mind and will their 
godly admonitions, submitting yourselves to their GODLY 
JUDGMENTS. 

Vow, " I will do so, the Lord being my helper." 

1 cannot express the horror at all that is implied in 
this oath, or the complete renunciation of all concern for 
God's mind, will and glory on the part of a professed Chris- 
tian minister ! Grace assisting me, I should a hundred fold 
choose to suffer at the stake than to take such an oath to an 
archangel, much less to sinful men. Selling myself to work 
their wills in preference to the will of my Saviour ! 

Having taken this oath, the candidate is initiated into fel- 
lowship in the Methodist Preacher's Church, and is put in 
full and complete connection with the great outer driving 
wheel — the bishops ; and is henceforth under their supreme 
jurisdiction. He is no longer his own — no longer a minis- 
ter of Jesus Christ to be governed exclusively by him — he 
has renounced his allegiance to the Saviour as his only mas- 
ter, king and lawgiver, and sworn allegiance to men. He 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 213 

belongs to his " chief ministers," and is enrolled among the 
' ; regulars" — to go whither they send him ; and go he must. 
and without asking any questions, and do he must whatever 
it is their pleasure to command him to do. God sends his 
ministers — and the Methodist bishops send theirs. Said Bish- 
op Asbury, u Show us [the bishops] the people who have 
no preacher, and whose language we understand, and we will 
send them one ; yes, we will send them one; for Methodist 
preachers are not militia who will not cross the lines ; they 
are regulars, and they must go." — Bond E. of M., p. 19. 

He has now entered freely upon his ministerial career. 
He has at least a praiseworthy ambition — it may be a 
purely selfish one. There are glittering prizes placed before 
his eyes. They are pointed out to him and he is urged to 
canvass for their attainment. He becomes tired of Moun- 
tain Cove and Piney-wood Circuits — the ministerial colleges 
of the Conference — he covets first one of the many rich 
neighborhood Circuits, then a town station, where there is 
better society, more fashion and pay — then he longs to be- 
come a metropolitan " star." Having tasted of a little au- 
thority over the laity, and being subject to the rigorous rule 
of his superior officers, he thirsts for power — the idol 
of the human heart. He looks upon the presiding El- 
dership with a longing eye. He has learned the characteris- 
tics that render a preacher popular with the Circuit Judge, 
and his reverence the Bishop, he prostitutes himself to the 
work, wins the prize, and enjoys a seat in the Bishop's Ca- 
binet. But his ambition is not satisfied while there is a gaol 
unwon. The exercise of power, and the incense of flattery, 
that power always secure, are gratifying to the pride of the 
human heart. The Bishops are getting old, and must die 
some day. Some Presiding Elders will be elected to wield 
their scepters, and why may not he as well be bishop as 



214 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

any other man? exactly — why may he not desire and labor 
for it, for the Apostle says (in King James' version) "he 
that desireth the office of a bishop, desireth a good work." 
Thus we see that the Stirrup is the first step of ascent to an 
Episcopal Throne ! 

I regard such a system of Ecclesiastical polity, offering an 
ascending scale of ministerial station, and rank and power, 
as not only manifestly unscriptural but eminently pernicious 
and corrupting, fostering as i.t does the rankest ambition in 
the ministry, and the cultivating of all those ways and 
means by which alone these ambitious ends can be attained 
when success depends not upon the will of the membership, 
but is in the arbitrary gift of clerical superiors, and where 

" Thrift only follows fawning."' 

What young minister of common ambition, or self-res- 
pect, if you please, would not desire to gain the rank of a 
presiding elder % I doubt if there was ever one who had 
not determined to be the Judge of the Quarterly Court 
before he had completed his Freshman year in his Mountain 
Cove, or Piney-wood College — if not before he had gradu- 
ated an Exhorter. 

If one reaches the deaconship with his obtuseness impene- 
trated with such an idea, the bishop is very careful to enter 
it in the ordination service, a clause of which reads thus : 

" May they [the young deacons] so well-behave themselves 
in this inferior office, that they may be found worthy to be 
called [not by God, but by the bishop] into the higher min- 
istries in thy Church ! " 

Their chief ministers, to whom is committed the govern- 
ment of them, are very willing for them to be ambitious, 
because they will be proportionably zealous, obedient, and 
subservient to their most arbitrary and despotic wishes 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 215 

Mark the means by which a Methodist preacher can hope for 
advancement in rank — elevation is alone in the gift of the 
superior clergy. They confer it only upon their favorites. 
The aspirant must labor to gain the superior good will of 
the presiding elder, and he can only do this by his zeal for 
Methodism, and the most extreme subserviency to his wishes. 
Here is a fair field, and the list open for flattery, fawning, 
and man worship. 

There is not one only seeking for good circuits, or town 
or metropolitan stations, or a cabinet appointment, but scores 
of aspirants ; hence what rivalship, what canvassing, what 
envy. But another feature in Methodism. Preachers are 
allowed and encouraged to be informants upon one another, 
and the presiding elder keeps his ears open and invites evil, 
as well as good reports. Indeed it is a part of his business 
to be a general scandal-monger. None but those who have 
toiled in the list can understand the pulling and working 
against, and checking each other in every way imaginable on 
the part of the rivals. What depreciation, insinuations, and 
misrepresentation often of each other. What tales and re- 
ports get to the elder's ears. Each known aspirant is under 
the strictest surveillance of all others. Many a one's popu- 
larity is blighted with the presiding elder, and he can dis- 
cover no trace of his enemy. What histories of " defeated 
efforts to reach the presiding eldership " circuit riders might 
write. What wrongs and injuries received. What partia- 
litv and favoritism, without merit, could be revealed ! 

Now I think it can be clearly shown that all this ambition, 
all these efforts for elevation, all the influences brought to 
bear upon them, tend to make these aspirants the more 
blind and reckless advocates of the peculiar and obnoxious 
features of the Discipline, and to have no mind, will, or con- 
science of their own, but to accomplish by all means the 



216 THE GKEAT IRON WHEEL. 

wishes of their leaders. We have shown that the favorites 
of the presiding elder are the favored ones. He acts upon 
the principle, " They that honor me will I honor." They 
must give themselves blindly* to the work of Methodism, 
to swell its numbers, and blindly to do the will of them that 
sent them. If opposition to other denominations is pleasing 
to his chief ministers, he must oppose contrary to reason or 
revelation. His zeal for his society must eat him up. By 
patience in so doing, he fixes the eye of his clerical superiors 
upon him. It will not do for him to hesitate about the pro- 
priety or scripturality of the measures he is advised to pur- 
sue ; to question whether any thing enjoined in the Discip- 
line agrees with, or is opposed to the teachings of God's 
word ; to hesitate, or to execute its laws weak-handed or 
faint-heartedly, would black-mark him at once. He must 
not consult his conscience. Suppose his presiding elder de- 

* A Methodist preacher vows to execute every point, great and 
small, in the Discipline. The blind and unprincipled subserviency 
implied in this can only be imagined, when it is remembered that the 
Discipline is subject to quadrennial changes. When the preacher 
pledges this, he does not and cannot know what he may be binding 
himself to endorse and observe. The Discipline may possess new fea- 
tures, new laws, after the next conference far more unscriptural than 
the present ; yet he must vow obedience to them, and to execute 
them, whatever they may be ! The present Discipline has rules for the 
extirpation of the evil of slavery. Should a preacher refuse to exe- 
cute this abolition feature, he is liable to exclusion this year. The 
present Conference, now in session, will doubtless abolish the abolition 
features of the Discipline, and the ten thousand preachers must change 
their principles, and doctor their consciences in eight and forty hours, 
to conform to the new law, for should they execute the old one after 
the new one has passed, they would be excluded at once— excluded 
to-day for executing a law that they would have been excluded yester- 
day for refusing to execute! Such are the rotary consciences 
required in Methodist preachers. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS, 217 

nied that immersion is even warranted by the Scriptures ; 
suppose he pronounces it indecent and disgusting, as all of your 
editors and most of your preachers do, and dissuade its use 
in his diocese, would it do for him, a circuit rider, to admit 
publicly or privately that immersion is scriptural baptism 
at all, or to immerse a person requesting it, however consci- 
entiously he may have believed it a Bible baptism before? 
Would he cultivate the good will of his elder, should he op- 
pose his judgment and wishes'? His hopes of elevation 
would be blighted at once. But why should he trouble him- 
self about right or wrong, or to inquire what is scriptural 
or not in church practices ? Has he not repeatedly pledged 
and sworn to observe every part, great and small, in the 
Discipline 1 What use has a Methodist preacher for a con- 
science or judgment of his own 1 Has he not vowed before 
God to have no mind or will of his own about anything* 
and to " reverently obey " and " follow with glad mind and 
will," and " submit himself to the godly judgments" \ of his 
clerical masters 1 He must "go it blind," shut his eyes, 
deafen his ears, stifle his conscience, harden his heart, and 
put his reason and judgment to open shame, should light, or 
argument, or truth, or God's Spirit, conflict with the interests 
of Methodism, or the requisitions of his " chief ministers, to 
whom is committed the government over him ! ! J 

Have we not seen repeated exemplifications of this spirit, 
and blind recklessness in the practice of Methodist preachers, 
when the interests of Methodism were suffering from the 
light and progress of truth in any given town or com- 
munity ? It is easy to be accounted for. It is the corrupting 
system, that the peculiar influences and iniquitous appliances 

* See Dis. p. 50. t Dis. p. 138. 

% We are aware that this is denied, but we will attempt to show it 
in the letter on the " Rights of the Laity." 
10 



218 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. 

under which Methodism works its ministers, that forces them 
into such ungodly measures, and not because they themselves 
are naturally more depraved in heart than other men. Thus 
we have seen that a system that more completely subordi- 
nates its ministers to the perfect and irresponsible dictation and 
domination of the episcopacy and its cabinet, could not be 
well devised. 

But while he surrenders to be ruled, he is allowed irre- 
sponsible authority and rule in return, under the eye of his 
overseers — and a very important consideration in the shape 
of a pecuniary provision for life, or good behavior. 

1. He is allowed the use of the keys of Mr. Wesley's 
kingdom, which he can open to whom, and shut against 
whomsoever he pleases, i. e., he can receive into or exclude 
from the society he rules, whomsoever he wills.* This 
clothes him with great importance in the eyes of the mem- 
bers. It is a fearful prerogative. 

2. He is allowed the absolute control over one class 
of officers or servants at least, and the virtual control of 
another. 

The Class Leaders (the fourth wheel) are the creatures 
of the preachers in charge. He can make and unmake them 
at his sovereign pleasure, without being required to give a 
reason to any one. It is enough that they prove unaccept- 
able to him. This is the highest office to which a lay mem- 
ber can aspire. He is virtually the pastor of the portion 
of society committed to him. It is incumbent upon him to 
inquire how every soul prospers, not only how each person 
observes the outward rules, but how he grows in the know- 
ledge and love of God, and freely inform the preacher. His 
influence with him is very great. It becomes the members 

* See Dis. p, 72. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 219 

to keep on good terms with their leaders, or they will very 
likely be called to account for something. The class leaders 
not only examine and confess their classes weekly, but they 
have charge of the " love feasts," and decide who may or may 
not be admitted. 

Stewards are virtually under the control of the preacher. 
He is allowed to nominate his stewards for election by the 
Quarterly Court. If they prove unacceptable, he can easily 
procure their dismission by that body, since the majority of 
it consists of his fellow-preachers — and they will assist him 
in this, to be assisted in like cases in return, and of class 
leaders, who must do the will of their preachers, or be dis- 
missed. The duty of the steward is to collect the expenses, 
and decide upon the provision allowed the preacher. He is 
also allowed to watch and inform upon the members.* 

The Methodist itinerant preacher has secured to him a 
comfortable support for life. While he preaches he receives 
a better salary than the majority of the ministers of other 
denominations, from his circuit or stations, and when he is 
unable to preach by reason of failing health or old age, he 
receives a life annuity from the proceeds of the book-fund. 

Methodist preachers have made a pretty general impres- 
sion upon the people that they preach for almost nothing, 
while other preachers receive fixed salaries. Now, I have 
no objection to preachers being paid, and well paid ; few, if 
any, receive as much as they should ; but I do object to false 
impressions. The Discipline seems so arranged as to keep 
back the support of the preacher, or to make the impression 
that he receives only $100, and if married the same for his 
wife, and a few dollars-for each of his children. 

Suppose you turn to page 166-167, and foot up the prob- 

* Dis. p. 168. 



220 THE GKEAT IKON WHEEL. 

able allowance made to a preacher with a family of five 
children. 

Allowed for himself and wife, $250 

" three children over 7, 72 

" two " under 7, 32 

" House rent, , 150 

Furniture, 50 

Table expenses, say 300* 

Fuel, and horse and cow feed, 150 

Travelling expenses, 25 

$1029 

Besides all this, provision is made for all his " occasional 
distresses," as sickness, &c, &c. Now, add his marriage fees 
and presents to the above sum, and we see a pretty hand- 
some support. If he is stationed in town or city, he would 
be allowed much more. The support received by the bish- 
ops is from $1,500 to $2,000. Surely Methodist preachers 
should be the last to complain. With such a support, and 
his old age snugly provided for, he can say, without feeling 
very bad, 

" No foot of land do I possess, 
No cottage in this wilderness." 

Methodist ministers are required by the Discipline to act 
as colporteurs to sell the books of the " Book Concern." 
Also to act as agents for their Church papers, and to place 
them in every family, if possible, in their own circuits. This 
accounts for the immense sale and wide-spread circulation 
of Methodist books, and the tremendous subscription list of 
their papers. They can collect every cent of the accounts 
due from their ministers or members, since the ministers are 

* Let the reader insert those of his own family for one year, if he 
thinks $300 is too much 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 221 

empowered to arraign the delinquent before the Society, and 
exclude him, if he is able and wont pay, and the minister is 
subject to trial, unless he pays. Look at it in the light of a 
circulating medium, the itinerancy is one of surprising effi- 
ciency. For it is not only made their solemn duty to sell 
their books, and gain patronage for the papers ; but it is 
made their pecuniary interest to do so. The nett profits of 
the Book Concern and of their Church papers, goes into the 
fund, which is used to pay up any deficiency in their salaries, 
and "to support them when superannuated. Unless their books 
are sold and their papers patronized, they would not only not 
receive that part of their salaries which their circuits or sta- 
tions fail to raise, but would have no fund to support them 
when superannuated. It is the most efficient scheme of col- 
portage in operation upon the face of the whole earth, and to 
it Methodism owes the rapid spread of its Societies in the 
United States. Methodist circuit riders are every where, sent 
to follow the tide of emigration into every new country, anti- 
cipating the movements of any other denomination, and pre- 
occupying the ground with their peculiar views, their books and 
their papers. Every man who can sell a few dollars worth of 
books or get a subscriber to their Church papers is useful to the 
Conference and is generally used. If he is not fit to operate in 
old communities, he is sent to the frontier settlements and ter- 
ritories. 

THE METHODIST PREACHER'S CHURCH. 

Before closing this lengthy letter allow me to ask for in- 
formation which is very much desired, and awakening no lit- 
tle inquiry of late, "To what Church do the chief ministers 
of Methodism — bishops, and travelling preachers belong ?" 

No one ever saw their names enrolled upon the class pa- 
pers, or upon the books of any local Society, I believe, and 



222 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

the question arises, Where are their names kept % On some 
Church-book, of course, if they belong to the Church, and 
upon. The local preachers and laity have their names en- 
rolled upon the books of the Society in any given place, and 
upon the class-papers of such a Society or "Church," but 
who ever saw the name of a travelling preacher, or presid- 
ing elder, or a bishop, upon the books of local societies, or 
Methodist Churches'? Where, then, are their names kept? 
Where do the rulers belong ? To the Church 1 Not if the 
local societies are churches. 

If I understand your scheme at all, the rulers have a 
church especially for themselves ; they do not deign to asso- 
ciate with the ruled — the " ignoble vulgus" 

The rulers all belong to the Annual Conferences, and no 
where else can their names be found. To the annual Con- 
ference are they amenable, and at its bar they are tried. I 
respectfully inquire if the annual Conferences, in and of 
themselves, are Christian Churches, or Churches at all 1 

If so . they are very singular ones, for they are Churches 
all the members of which are ruling preachers, and where 
do we find an instance of such a Church in the New Testa- 
ment 1 All annual Conferences are composed of preachers, 
and rulers only ! If annual Conferences are not Churches, 
then Methodist preachers belong to no Church — not even to 
the Methodist Episcopal Church ! ! If they are members of 
a Church at all, then are the annual Conferences' Clerical 
Churches, or the Rulers' Church — an imperial and privi- 
leged body, into which no layman can ever enter, more than 
Peri into Paradise !* 

* I hope my brethren ministers and members wil aid me in asking 
this question until an answer is obtained : "Are annual Conferences 
Churches ?" If not, Tc what Church do the rulers of Methodism 
belong ? 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 223 

Is not this so ? But, to which body you, yourself, and your 
fellow-bishops belong — whether to the Societies, or the mem- 
bers' Church, or to the travelling preachers' Church, or whe- 
ther you bishops have a Church of your own — the bishops' 
Churchy or as privileged characters, belong to no Church, I 
am unable to learn. I know you can be disciplined by 
General Conference alone, and I suppose that persons must 
belong to the jurisdiction or government that can discipline 
them. 

I would respectfully ask you, Bislfop Soule, if the apostles, 
and ministers and bishops of the New Testament Churches 
were not members of the same body that the brethren were ? 
See Acts i., 13, 16. Were not the twelve apostles members 
of the Church at Jerusalem with Mary and the one hundred 
and twenty disciples, and the same body to which the three 
thousand were added ? Answer this. Were not the bishops 
or pastors of the Churches of Antioch, Ephesus, Corinth, 
and the Angels of the Seven Churches of Asia, members of 
those local bodies ? Why then are you not a member of 
the society in Franklin, and why are not your ministers 
members of the societies ? Again, Were not each of the 
above Churches, in and of itself, a complete Church ? Did 
it take two, or five, or all the Seven Churches of Asia to 
make one Church, as it does all the Methodist E. Societies in 
the whole South to make the Methodist Episcopal Church 
South? 

Is one of your local Societies a complete Church ? Is the 
McKindree Society in this city a complete Church ? Is the 
so-called Methodist Church in Franklin, within a short dis- 
tance of your house, a Church? If so, are you a member of 
it ? If not, in what local body is your membership ? I ask 
for information not through a prurient curiosity. I wish to 
understand your polity so as not to misrepresent it. I am 



221 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

an honest inquirer after truth. I do not wish to misrepresent 
your Church polity. I seek information of you, the highest 
source of authority in Methodism. If I am wrong, however 
humble and unworthy you may regard me, will you, if a 
child of God, deny me light, and allow me to go on in error 
misleading and causing others to sin ? Be it far from you. 



LETTER XX. 



LOCAL PREACHERS. 

What they forfeit in locating — Strong considerations to keep 
them in the saddle — they are degraded — The petty oppression 
to which they subject themselves — Loss of influence. 

Dear Sir : — A travelling preacher is evidently considered 
the most useful to your Society, and, indeed, the only legiti- 
mate preacher ; consequently, the strongest possible influ- 
ences are brought to bear upon the preachers to keep them 
in the saddle, and every obstacle thrown in the way to deter 
them from locating, or becoming pastors. 

The office of Pastor, the most common office of the Chris- 
tian minister in the days of the Apostles, is wholly ignored 
by you, and that of the Evangelist substituted in its place. 
Thus you oppose your wisdom to that of the Head of the 
Church. You have no pastors settled with your Societies to 
go in and out before them, whose daily example and pious 
living, and the influence of whose whole life of godliness 
may be exerted upon the members and their rising families. 
Your people have " strangers " for their shepherds. So soon 
as they come to know and love the preacher, his labors are 
interrupted in the midst of the greatest usefulness, and he 
10* « 



226 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

is torn from them and sent, they know not whither, and a 
stranger thrust into his place. They are not even allowed 
the right to petition for his return. This evil and wrong is 
deeply felt and deplored by preachers and people. 

But the travelling preacher — after spending the best of his 
days, and wearing out the strength and vigor of his manhood 
in the service of the "Church," under the authority of the 
bishop, — for reasons satisfactory to himself, determines to 
«« locate." 

1. He may have felt the influence of some malignant star 
— he has not gained the favor of his Presiding Elders, and 
while he has labored hard and done well, he has been shuf- 
fled about from one side of the Conference to the other to 
fill " hard appointments" to make room for favorites. He 
has become disheartened, broken in spirit, and perhaps ren- 
dered measurebly useless from the treatment, and he re- 
solves to locate and spend the residue of his strength ill 
building up the cause in some destitute neighborhood ; or, 

2. His family may have become large, and his wife sickly, 
and no longer able to break up and move every year or two 
and be jaded about from "pillar to post," .from one side of 
the Conference to the other, without the shadow of a reason, 
and he is compelled to locate ; or, 

3. He is imperatively required to be more at home, to 
assist in the proper government of his children ; or, 

4. His own health has become too feeble to endure the 
hardships of itinerancy, while, as pastor, he might be able to 
do good service for many years, and Providence seems to 
open a wide and effectual door of usefulness before him. 

Exercising the right of private judgment as to the field in 
which to labor, which is the inalienable right of every minister 
of Jesus Christ, he locates. Few can appreciate what the step 
costs him. The polity of Methodism seems to have been ar- 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 227 

ranged with a design to deter the settlement of its ministers, 
since it must be done at the sacrifice of everything connected 
with Methodism dear to a Methodist preacher's heart. 

1. When riding his hard circuits in mountains and coves, 
through rain or snow, heat and coid, preaching, selling books 
and circulating his church papers, it was a consolation to 
him to know that he was securing for himself an interest in 
a fund from which he would be supported when he had worn 
himself out, and should he fall in the midst of his years, his 
poor widow and orphaned children would be supported from 
the fruits of his labors. In locating, from whatever cause, 
he is cut off from all this, and cuts his wife and children off 
from any prospective benefit of the labors of a long life. He 
forfeits all his right and interest in the preacher's fund, w r hich 
he has spent his best days to accumulate ! Is this equitable 1 
Who doubts that multitudes of Methodist preachers became 
such through the influence of this strong consolation held out 
to them by the elders ? And who doubts that multitudes con- 
tinue their connection with the Methodist through the influ- 
ence of this fund for superannuated preachers, and the widows 
and children of preachers 1 Understand me, I do not object 
to the Church of Christ providing for the old age of its 
ministers, or the widows and orphans of its ministers, as well 
as its own poor, far from- it. It is its duty to do so, but I do 
regard it as unjust and cruel to subject its ministers to the 
forfeiture of all this, because they regard it their duty and 
for the glory of God, to labor altogether in one field ! 

2. But more, he is degraded at once in the eyes of the 
whole travelling connection, in the eyes of his bishop, of the 
world, for they take care that it shall be so. He forfeits 
his membership in the preacher's church — the annual Confer- 
ence, and he is excluded from it, and refused in all time to 
come, if he remains a local preacher, all possible connection 



228 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

with it. He can never again have a seat in that body, par- 
ticipate in the counsels of his brethren, for the extension of 
the cause for which he has so long and faithfully labored and 
sacrificed the best of his days. 

3. He is degraded from the rank he held with them and 
his name is erased as no longer worthy of appearing among 
those of the "travelling connection," and he falls one degree 
in rank and more than one in respect and influence. Indeed 
he must take the lowest place and be subjected not only to 
the rule of his equals, but his inferiors in every respect, age, 
learning, character and usefulness. 

4. His name is carried down and put upon a class paper, 
and some smooth-chin and brainless boy of a class leader 
now has jurisdiction over the aged veteran in conjunction 
with some equally endowed circuit rider! What a fall' 
what a degradation ! How humiliating to a man possessed 
of self-respect ! 

5. He is subjected to the most rigid and oppressive espion- 
age on the part of those whose love of rule is gratified in 
subjecting their former sovereign to their wills, if they have 
no old scores to settle with him. 

I said the law, touching local preachers, can be executed 
by class leaders and their preacher in charge, so as to be 
made insupportably oppressive. It requires that the names 
of all local preachers shall be enrolled in the journal of the 
quarterly Conference, and also on a class paper, and they 
shall meet in class, if the distance of his residence is not too 
great, (and health, of course, will permit, but this is not 
mentioned,) and if he neglect he may be deprived of his min- 
isterial office ! Who is to report his absence from " class ?" 
The class leader, of course. Who is to judge if his health 
is sufficient to attend class ? Who allowed to decide that his 
distance is not " too great," or the weather not too inclement, 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 229 

or his excuse insufficient ? The class leader and preacher in 
charge. They cannot exclude him without a hearing, but 
they can arraign him as often as they please before the quar- 
terly court — the majority of it being class leaders and preach- 
ers in charge, and he being nothing but a local minister, and 
can be represented as troublesome, disposed to exercise too 
much authority and influence, and greatly in the way — the 
class leaders and circuit riders can easily come to the con- 
clusion that upon the ivhole he had better be divested of his 
ministerial office. He can appeal to the annual Conference 
to be sure, but he knows that there is little favor shown a poor 
local preacher in that body, and if he has become obnoxious 
to his travelling preacher, and is considered in the way, he 
knows there is little chance for him and he yields to his fate, 
and falls like a noble eagle tormented, wearied, and pecked 
to death by a flock of tomtits, or as an elephant is said to be 
killed by a swarm of ants ! 

If he has rendered himself obnoxious to the presiding 
elder and preacher in charge, by any exhibition of restive- 
ness under their petty oppression, determines to consult his 
usefulness and happiness by simply removing to a distant 
neighborhood, he does it at the forfeiture of his ministerial 
office, for the law empowers the presiding elder or preacher 
in charge to give or withhold a certificate of his official stand- 
ing as they please, for if he removes without a certificate from 
one of these, " he shall not (1) be received as a local prea- 
cher in other places."* The heart of many a local preacher 
has been crushed under the cruel and irresponsible domina- 
tion of ill-disposed and arrogant class leaders ! 

Local preachers are generally a persecuted class. Their 
motives for locating are questioned. Their fidelity to 

* Bee Discipline p. 70. 



230 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

" Methodism" is suspicioned. They are regarded as deser- 
ters from the ministerial ranks. Such a step is made a 
reproach by the " riding" class, and by Methodist Editors. 
A local preacher thus expostulates with Mr. McFerrin, the 
editor of the Methodist Advocate in this city, who, living at 
home and on a fat salary, can even write disrespectfully of 
local preachers, and seek to fix reproach upon them. We 
make an extract from the article as it will throw light upon 
feeling existing, as a necessary consequence, between local 
preachers and the "pets" of the presiding elders: 

" You seemed at a loss to understand how we could recon- 
cile it to our consciences to leave the regular work to serve 
tables. If this does not make it a ' reproach,' at least, by 
implication, then we were mistaken as to the real force of 
your language. We are willing to admit that you did not 
design to make it a reproach, but we still think that the 
general tenor of your article warranted that conclusion. 

" 'As to Brother Hicks' remarks about the bishop and his 
cabinet, fat appointments, &c, &c, &c, we pretend not to 
know anything.' The language we have italicized in the 
preceding sentence, was remarkably well selected. From 
our personal knowledge of you, we are perfectly satisfied 
of your sincerity when you say, ' We never directly or indi- 
rectly sought for any special appointment ;' yet in reference 
to some you have known, it is indeed well to say, ' we pretend 
not to know anything.' Verily, it is best, in some cases, to 
be ignorant. 

" Some preachers, who,, with a great deal of sanctimonious- 
ness, venture to say ' they are not afraid of hard appoint- 
ments' so manage it as to remain located for years near 
some comfortable farm, or important mercantile interest; 
and the truth is, there is no such thing as moving them. 
The bishop dare not do it. He is told plain out, { Thus far 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 231 

we will go, and ri) farther." While others are shuffled 
about from one side of the Conference to the other ; as it 
were, a matter of pastime. Have you never known a 
brother, who has done well on a circuit for one year, taken 
up and put down at the same distant point, simply to make 
room for some of the immovables ? 

"All this, to some extent, has perhaps, grown out of another 
evil, which seems to be prevalent in every Conference where 
we have been. We have reference to that system of favor- 
itism that ought not to exist among men professing godliness. 
some are 'petted, and kept constantly under the wings of their 
presiding elders, while others, equally as deserving, are left 
to weather the winds and rains as best they can. These 
things you may ' pretend not to know,' but mere lookers-on 
in Vienna have seen them. And we honestly believe they 
have done more toward breaking down our 'time-honored 
itinerancy,' than anything else." — Advocate of August 1853. 

If the preacher locates with a very extensive and power- 
ful influence, he becomes obnoxious at once, to the " preacher 
in charge." Suppose he is a far superior preacher, and the 
people far more desirous of hearing him, and his opinion far 
more influential in the town or community, the circuit rider 
is not long discovering it, nor long in putting on foot a 
course of treatment to remedy the (whim) evil. The class 
leader is enlisted and the discipline is put into rigid execu- 
tion against him. It is bruited about that he wont or dont 
observe the rules — very good but not pious — not much of a 
Methodist in his feelings, for he don't attend class. Every 
absence is noted, and they are frequent it may be, for not 
having been accustomed to " attend class," since it is not re- 
quired of the privileged orders, Preachers, Presiding Elders, 
or Bishops it comes rather hard to him — it is distasteful, tell- 
ing his experience over fifty -two times a year, and being 



232 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

asked as many times by a class leader in whom he may 
have no confidence. " Well, Brother W., how d' you feel'' 
or, " well, do you love the cause brother A. ?" Bah ! Just 
as though there was any doubt of it ! 

Not only can he be watched for failing to attend class, the 
" leader" and preacher being allowed to decide if he lives 
near enough and if his health is sufficient, if the weather is 
good enough and if his excuses are sufficient or insufficient, 
which gives them room to bring him to trial a dozen times a 
year, it may be, but more than this is allowed them ; the 
preacher may reprehend him on a bare report that the local 
preacher has used improper words, and the preacher is the 
judge what words are improper in a local preacher, or is he 
reported to be guilty of improper tempers, and the preacher 
is the judge, or improper actions, and his reverence, the preach- 
er in charge, is the judge !* These reports may be utterly 
groundless — may have been put in circulation by the class 
leader as a part of the scheme to injure him, yet two or 
three trials for words, tempers, and actions, and as many 
appeals taken to the higher courts, and that local preacher's 
influence and usefulness, however great they may have been, 
are at an end, though he may have been triumphantly acquit- 
ted. Such is the frailty of ministerial reputation. 

By treatment similar to this and the discipline allows it, 
and it seems for this very purpose, places the character, use- 
fulness and happiness of the local preacher in the hands of 
the class leader and preacher in charge, and he is shortly 
reduced to a cypher. We know of several local preachers 
and we have but written their history, and theirs is the 
history of scores and hundreds. Where is there a local 
preacher who ever left the circuit with a commanding charac- 



* See Discipline page 91. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 233 

ter and controlling* influence, who was ever able to keep it 
five years'? More, lives there a local preacher who enjoys 
to-day one-tenth the influence and reputation he did when a 
member of the Preacher's Church ? He is a degraded 
man. He is snubbed about and domineered over by beardless 
class-leaders and circuit-riders until he loses his self-respect. 

What chapters of the lives and wrongs of local preachers 
might be written ! The iron has pierced through the soul of 
hundreds, and they, who have been the faithful servants of 
their society through the vigor of youth and strength of 
manhood, are going down to their graves dishonored and 
oppressed by its unfeeling unkindness and tyranny. 

I dedicate this chapter, through you, to the thousands of 
local preachers in the South-west. A church polity which 
admits of the corruption of ministerial rank and such irre- 
sponsible oppression of the deserving, cannot be warranted 
by the Scriptures, but must be displeasing to the Saviour, 
who said, " So it shall not be among yow." 



LETTER XXI. 



The Roman Catholic features — the Doctrine of the Power of 
the " Keys" held by the Methodist Clergy in common with 
the Pope — The Divine right to govern held by the Method- 
ists in common with the Pope and Priests of Rome — 
Methodist Ministers claim the power to admit into, and 
exclude from, their societies whomsoever they please, and 
the Discipline grants them the power. 

The Christian who enters one of Wesley's societies surrenders all his rights 
as a man and a Christian, and fearfully jeopardizes both his moral and Christian 
character. m 

Dear Sir : — I have frequently declared that, according 
to my understanding of your Discipline, it virtually gave 
your ministers supreme power over the societies, empower- 
ing them certainly to receive into, and virtually to exclude 
from them, whomsoever they pleased. For this opinion I 
have been pronounced a falsifier of your polity, a mis- 
representer of your Discipline, and a slanderer of Method- 
ism. Now, sir, I have collected sufficient authority, I think, 
to clear myself of these charges, and I herewith submit it to 
your decision. If my proofs and authorities are insufficient to 
sustain me, I appeal to you, as a professed Christian teacher 
and father, to show me their inconclusiveness ; and which 
if you do, I promise to retract at once my expressed opinion. 

(234) 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 235 

But if I sustain myself — if my opinion is correct, you need 
not take the trouble to write — your silence will be an all- 
sufficient consent. 

I will state my charges definitely. 

You hold and teach that the " keys of the kingdom of 
heaven," were committed alone into the hands of the Method- 
ist clergy, and so the Church of Rome teaches.* 

That thus empowered, your ministers can receive into, and 
exclude from the Church, whomsoever they please, allowing 
the laity, by right, no voice in the matter whatever. 

If this be so, every one will admit it is conferring upon 
Methodist ministers the most dangerous powers. It makes 
each preacher the absolute Pope, during his short reign, over 
the societies in his circuit. He can open, and no man, not 
all the members of the society protesting, can shut — and he 
can shut the door, though against virtue, piety, and worth, 
and all the membership cannot open ! Is not such absolute 
priestly power as this repugnant to every Christian heart, as 
it is opposed to every teaching of the Saviour or apostles ? 
Ought it not to be as heartily abhorred, frowned upon, and 
repudiated by American citizens — republican democrats, as 
the same priestly features is in the Roman Catholic Church 1 
Certainly, if true. But is it not true % 

I propose to prove it, 1. By the Discipline. 2. By an 
episcopal decision. 3. By the declarations of your most 
accredited writers. 

1. The Discipline proceeds upon the ground that the su- 
preme governing power of the society is in the hands of the 
ministry. In the direction for the reception of members, it 



* And so the Presbyterians teach, that the keys were committed into 
the hands of the ruling elders, who can open and shut the Church at 
their pleasure. 



236 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

gives no one but the preacher in charge any voice in the 
matter. It allows the applicant to be recommended to 
the preacher by the class-leader, but it does not say that 
the preacher shall receive him upon this recommendation. 
It provides for the examination of the applicant before the 
society, but it does not say that, if the examination is sat- 
isfactory to every member of the society, the minister 
shall receive him. Not a word of it. It is left with the 
preacher in charge to decide whether the applicant shall be 
received or not. If from another Church, his answers must 
be satisfactory to the preacher alone. I submit the whole 
chapter on the reception of members. 

" Of the Reception of Members into the Church. 
# 

" Q. How shall we prevent improper persons from insin- 
uating themselves into the Church ? 

"A. 1. Let none be admitted on trial, except they are well 
recommended by one you know, or until they have met 
twice or thrice in class. 

" 2. Read the rules to them the first time they meet. 

" 3. Let none he received into the Church until they are rec- 
ommended by a leader, with who?n they have met at least six 
months on trial, and have been baptized ; and shall on exami- 
nation by the minister in charge before the Church, give satis- 
factory assurances, both of the correctness of their faith, and 
their willingness to observe and keep the rules of the Church. 
Nevertheless, if a member in good standing in any other 
orthodox Church shall desire to unite with us, such applicant 
may, by giving satisfactory answers to the usual inquiries, 
be received at once into full fellowship." 

No candid man will deny that this is a fair construction 
of the chapter, and even the uncandid must admit that this 
construction could be put upon it by the preacher. But I 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 237 

shall prove it by the decision of Bishop Capers, that the 
minister in charge has the right to say how the Discipline 
shall be construed. The Discipline plainly vests the power 
to receive members in the hands of the minister, consequently 
to shut the door against whom he will. It also virtually in- 
vests him with the power to exclude from the- society an 
obnoxious member. 

I submit the whole statute touching the trial of accused 
members. 

Q. 2. How shall an accused member be brought to trial % 

A. 1. Before the society of which he is a member, or a 
select number of them, in the presence of a bishop, elder, 
deacon, or preacher, in the following manner : Let the accused 
and accuser be brought face to face ; but if this cannot be 
done, let the next best evidence be procured. If the accused 
person be found guilty by the decision of a majority of the 
members before whom he is brought to trial, and the crime 
be such as is expressly forbidden by the word of God, suffi- 
cient to exclude a person from the kingdom of grace and 
glory, let the minister or preacher who has the charge of the 
circuit expel him. If the accused person evade a trial by 
absenting himself, after sufficient notice given him, and the 
circumstances of the accusation be strong and presumptive, 
let him be esteemed as guilty, and be accordingly excluded. 
Witnesses from without shall not be rejected. 

2. But in case of neglect of duties of any kind, imprudent 
conduct, indulging sinful tempers, or words, or disobedience 
to the order and discipline of the Church, first let private re- 
proof be given by a preacher or leader ; and if there be an 
acknowledgment of the fault, and proper humiliation, the 
person may be borne with. On a second offence, the preacher 
or leader may take one or two faithful friends. On the third 
offence, let the case be brought before the society, or a select 



238 THE GKEAT IRON WHEEL. 

number, and ii "here be no sign of rearl humiliation, the 
offender must be cut off. 

3. If a member of our Church shall be clearly convicted 
of endeavoring to sow dissension in any of our societies, by 
inveighing against either our doctrines or discipline, such per- 
sons so offending shall be first reproved by the senior minis- 
ter or preacher of his circuit, and if he persist in such per- 
nicious practices, he shall be expelled from the Church. 

4. Nevertheless, if in any of the above-mentioned cases 
the minister or preacher differ in judgment from a majority 
of the society, or the select number, concerning the innocence 
or guilt of the accused person, the trial, in such case, may be 
referred by the minister or preacher to the ensuing quarterly 
meeting Conference. 

5. If there be a murmur or complaint from any excluded 
person, in any of the above-mentioned instances, that justice 
has not been done, he shall be allowed an appeal to the next 
quarterly meeting Conference ; except such as absent them- 
selves from trial, after sufficient notice is given them ; and the 
majority of the travelling and local preachers, exhorters, stew- 
ards, and leaders present, shall finally determine the case. 

Under the above statute I claim that any member, how- 
ever innocent he may be of any immorality, or however 
pious and conscientious, should he be obnoxious to the 
preacher, can be excluded by the unreasonable and dan- 
gerous powers committed to him. 

Suppose A. is the obnoxious member. The minister can 
bring him to trial upon the plea that he has neglected some 
duty enjoined by the Discipline — he may have conscientious 
objections to attending band or class-meetings — he may ar- 
raign him for conduct he considers improper — the preacher 
may fret the member, aye, insult him, until he looses the 
command of his temper, and thus cause him to use improper 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 289 

words, and then he can indict him for " indulging a sinful 
temper or words." 

The member may conscientiously object to some of the 
features in the Discipline — say the abolition feature of the 
notorious 9th section, or against band or class-meetings, or 
against the close communion feature (see page 96) ; or 
he may refuse to have his children sprinkled, because his 
preacher can show him no authority in God's Word (yet 
the Discipline requires it) ; or he may object to giving the 
Supper to impenitent unbaptized persons, as Methodists do ; 
or he may regard the practice and doctrine of denying 
baptism to a young convert for six months as unwarranted, 
or the seekership feature of the society as gernicious, or he 
cannot conscientiously teach and propagate the doctrine of 
• ; falling from grace," i. e., the possibility of the ultimate 
apostacy and damnation of a genuine child of God — a doc- 
trine subversive of the whole economy of redemption through 
Christ, dishonoring to Christ, and pernicious, and that con- 
tinually ; we say the preacher can arraign him upon some 
count, for we do not believe that there is one intelligent 
Christian man in the Methodist societies who can endorse, 
teach, and applaud every feature of the Discipline. We 
never conversed with a Methodist ten minutes concerning it, 
who did not repudiate many of its features. 

Well, A. is brought to trial. Now, every lawyer, and 
every one who has suffered in law, will tell yen that the ver- 
dict depends on the jury. The lawyer will tell you, " Let 
me pick my own jury, and I will condemn or acquit any man." 
Well, the Discipline provides that the accused shall be tried 
either before the society, or a select number ; but who is to 
decide whether he shall be brought before the society or the 
select number ? The prosecutor. If he decides that he shall 
"be tried before a " select" jury, who has the power to select 



240 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

the jury, or to decide of how many it shall consist? The 
prosecuting preacher. Can he not select his own tools and 
dependants, the class-leaders, to do his work 2 Certainly. 
Cannot the preacher employ what witnesses he pleases % 
Does the Discipline allow the accused the right to object to, 
or disqualify, any witness or juror % It does not. It is with 
the preacher to say who shall testify and who sit upon the 
jury. Both witnesses and the jury may be the defendant's 
most implacable enemies ! But may the preacher remain 
with his jury while they make up their judgment ? The Dis- 
cipline is silent ; he doubtless will feel that it is his duty to do 
so — since it is his prerogative alone to construe the law, the 
select number might not know on what law or evidence to 
render judgment. When the judgment is rendered, who is 
to award the punishment % The preacher! Comment is 
unnecessary ! Who would give a sixpence for his character 
or life if the civil law allowed his enemy, clothed with such 
iniquitous powers, to prosecute him ? 

It is urged that the condemned can appeal to the quarterly 
court. Certainly he may. But of whom is that court com- 
posed % Of preachers, of class-leaders, stewards,' and ex- 
horters ! It would be natural for preachers to aid each 
other in ridding their societies of members obnoxious to 
them — members who are obstacles to their tyranny; and cer- 
tainly the class-leaders would not willingly offend their mas- 
ters, and thus lose their favor and offices at the same time ! 
The preachers having things their own way in the quarterly 
Conferences, a poor layman would stand no chance for jus- 
tice, if the preacher had decreed his ruin. 

It is urged that the preacher in charge is not authorized to 
construe the language of the Discipline, so as to decree how 
and by whom the accused shall be tried % 

I submit an episcopal decision. The following interrogatory 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 241 

was proposed to Bishop Capers daring the last Conference, 
held in Trenton, Tennessee. " Has the preacher in charge a 
right to say how the Discipline should be construed ¥' 

Bishop Capers. — " He has the right." 

Every man at all acquainted with common law will say 
that this decision virtually makes each preacher in charge a 
supreme and absolute ruler, aye, despot if you please. Who 
now will, can deny that the preacher in charge is the pope 
of the societies he oversees ? And what freeborn democrat- 
ic republican ; what Christian man, whom Christ has made 
free, free from petty priestcraft and ecclesiastical despotism ; 
what man who respects his inalienable rights or prizes his 
Christian or moral character, would trust himself and his 
character in such a government 1 Two or three enemies and 
one circuit-rider, could effect his degradation and ruin at 
their sovereign pleasure. Think of it, reflect candidly 
upon it. 

Having producd the Discipline and an episcopal decision to 
sustain me, I now submit the authority of your learned doc- 
tors of Methodism, your editors and accredited writers. Dr. 
Hodgson, in his letter to the Philadelphia Christian Advocate^ 
says : 

" Our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the ' Head over all things 
to the Church,' conferred upon his apostles, in the words 
following, the authority not only to teach, but also to rule :" 

"And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of hea- 
ven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound 
in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall 
be loosed in heaven." Matt. xvi. 19; xviii. 16. He also 
contends for the possession of this same power in the clergy 
of the present day. 

What more does the Popish clergy contend for, to sup- 
port their lofty and Antichristian pretensions to rule the 
11 



242 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

Church of God 1 Is not this passage the very one they rely 
upon % Do they not put the very same construction ipon 
it % If Methodists are right, the Catholics are equally so. If 
the Romish clergy impose upon the laity and subjugate them 
to their authority by the false construction of this passage, 
so do the Methodist clergy also. Catholics passively allow 
their clergy to exercise supreme rule over the Church, so do 
the members of Methodist societies ! If imposition is 
practised in the one case, it is equally so in the other. But 
again Dr. H. says : . 

" Thus we have been able to trace the supreme governing 
power of the Church from Christ to the apostles, from the 
apostles to the bishops, presbyters or elders, but no further. 
All attempts to prove that it belongs, in whole or in part 
to the laity, utterly fail." 

Is not this conclusive % Will not this satisfy you and all 
Methodists, that I have not misrepresented their polity, 
when I have declared that you and your clergy claim to 
exercise, and do exercise, the supreme governing power of 
the Church, the laity having no part or lot in the matter, 
any more than the blind, priest-ridden Catholic 1 ? What 
greater power, Mr. Soule, does, or can, the Pope of Rome 
exercise than the supreme power. He claims that the 
supreme power to rule the Church was committed to Pope 
Peter, and through him to Pope Pio Nono, while you claim 
that it was committed to Bishop Peter, who was also an 
elder, and through a succession of bishops and elders, to you 
and your elders. What more have you to claim but that 
those to whom you and your ministers refuse to open the 
door of the Church, and those against whom you close it, are 
shut out of heaven, to invest your Church with all the 
powers and terrors of the Church of Rome, and you and 
your brother bishops and ministers, with all the impious 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 243 

prerogatives of the man of sin and son of perdi- 
tion?!! 

In the name of an offended God and insulted Saviour — by- 
all the terrors of the doom of Antichrist and false teachers, 
I beg, I entreat of you, in all affection and earnestness, think 
upon these things. Are you not opposing a rival, a human 
society to the kingdom of Christ ? And are you not perverting 
his laws and the teachings of his word to deceive and mislead 
into it the unreflecting multitude, who suppose any organ- 
ization called a Church is as legitimate and scriptural as any 
other 1 

But I have still other proof, and of the highest possible 
authority. It is that of the editor of the great central organ 
of Methodism, The Christian Advocate and Journal, of 
New -York city. The editor says : 

"Now, whatever others may think, the Methodists have 
always professed to believe that the Head of the Church still 
gives us pastors and teachers. Some pretenders have 
deceived us, we admit, and we have reason to believe that 
the primitive churches were not exempted from this misfor- 
tune. But still, we have much cause of thankfulness to God, 
in the bestowment of so many pastors and teachers whose 
faithfulness, gifts and success, assure us of their divine call to 
the ministry. To these we accord the scriptural authority of 
admitting to the ordinances of the Lordh house such as believe 
through their word. 

" We know nothing of the right of the society to admit 
members into church fellowship ; and the Methodist preacher 
who concedes this right, betrays his trust, and should be held 
amenable for his delinquency to his brethren. We know not 
if this has ever happened ; but Mr. Lee speaks of the con- 
trary doctrine as a matter which is not questionable ; and 
hence we have inferred that he, at least, practised upon this 



244: THE GEE AT IKON WHEEL. 

opinion when he was a travelling preacher ; and, as he has 
done so with impunity, if he has done so at all, we have been 
led to fear that some portions of the Church may be gradu- 
ally sliding into a compromise, which would so alter the 
relation between pastor and people as to subvert our whole 
economy. 

" It will not be understood tha: we object to the pastor's 
consulting with the society, or such of the members as he 
may deem best qualified to advise him, or give him informa- 
tion with regard to the probable sincerity of the applicant 
for membership. On the contrary, the pastor is bound to 
do this; but it must never be put to vote, either in the 
society or elsewhere. Having made the proper inquiries, 
and being satisfied of the desire of the candidate ' to flee the 
wrath to come, and save his soul,' he must admit him on 
probation ; and at the expiration of the probationary term, 
if he have a good report from the leader, and if it shall 
appear that he has continued to ' evidence his desire of salva- 
tion' by a conformity to the requirements in our ' general 
rules,' the pastor must admit him to full membership, what- 
ever objections may be made to it by the fastidious or cen- 
sorious. 

" But whatever controversy may exist on this question 
elsewhere, or however it may have been settled among other 
denominations, it is certain that ' the right of the society to 
admit and expel church members^ is not Wesleyan nor Epis- 
copalian Church Methodism. ' We have no such practice, 
neither any of the churches,' acting under our Discipline. 

" The admission and expulsion of church members by a 
vote of the Society, is as absurd in theory as it would be 
ruinous in practice." 

In view of the above proofs I submit the question to you 
and to the most prejudiced members of your societies, have 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 245 

I misrepresented your polity f Do not your ministers claim 
to possess the " keys of the kingdom of heaven" that were 
committed to Peter ? And is not this key power a danger- 
ous prerogative to assume and to use ? 

Let the convert, about joining one of your societies, 
remember, that he enters a society in which he must 
surrender every natural and religious right, place his char- 
acter and temporal salvation in the hands of irresponsible 
preachers, who will allow him no voice in administering the 
government of the society, no voice in deciding who shall be 
introduced into the fellowship of the society ; that he subjects 
himself to the liability to be tried at any time for the most 
trifling offence, aye, excluded from the society and Church 
(of Christ, if Methodist societies be churches of Christ), and 
his Christian and moral character tarnished for ever, and that, 
too, for violating no precept of God's Word, but simply one 
of the unscriptural traditions of the elders of the Methodist 
Episcopal Church i Excluded from the Church, not for hav- 
ing violated the New Testament of our Lord and Saviour 
Jesus Christ, but the ever-changing testament of his lords 
and masters, the bishops and travelling preachers ! And let 
such a man remember, also, when he is upon his trial for 
some real or alleged violation of the Discipline, he is 
not allowed to challenge the jury that is packed against 
him, or disqualify a witness, even though he be an enemy 
that may have been summoned to testify against him, 
but must submit to be led as a sheep to the slaughter, dumb 
as a lamb before its shearers. 

Were the annals of their trials but published, what gross 
injustice, what cruel wrongs, what wanton and irremediable 
injuries would be brought to light! How many inno- 
cent and devoted Christians have been sacrificed to the envy 
or revenge of those appointed by the Gentiles to rule 



246 REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 

over him ! I appeal to you in the behalf of the inalienable 
rights of the 500,000 of your members, that you repeal 
this inquisitorial feature from the statute-book of your 
societies. 



LETTER XXII. 



The principle of the "Key Power" still further examined — 
It involves the Romish Dogma of Apostolical Succession and 
Infallibility — All Protestant Church Polities are adminis- 
tered in accordance with this Doctrine — Protestants cannot 
successfully combat the Papacy. 

Dear Sir : — It must be evident that the authority to deny 
the laity all participation in the government of the Church, 
and the doctrine of apostolic succession and Church or clerical 
infallibility (the Methodist clergy are the Church, since in 
their hands are concentrated the supreme legislative, judicial 
and executive powers), rest upon the same ground, and, 
therefore, you can as reasonably assert the claim of infallibility 
as the " power of the keys," i. e., the supreme governing 
power. 

The Catholic apostacy rests her infallibility upon the ground 
you rest your " key power," and indeed she is consistent, for 
to assert the " power without assuming infallibility in its use, 
is absurd and preposterous." Mark the reasoning of Rome : 
" In constituting the Christian Church, Christ directly com- 
missioned a body, or corporation of ministers, or clergymen, 
to whom he gave authority to expound the doctrines of Christ- 
ianity to the laity, to administer to them certain ordinances 
or sacraments, and also to ordain and consecrate other minis- 
ters or clergy to the exercise of these divinely-appointed func- 

(24T) 



248 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

tions, and he promised, in the power of his Spirit, to be with 
this organization of his Church until the ending of the world." 

According to this theory, the Catholic laity, in perfect con- 
sistency with its principles, renounce all right to the exercise 
of any individual or private judgment respecting the doctrines 
of Christianity, as expounded to them by their clergy, re- 
specting the signification or interpretation of the Scripture 
writings, and they repose, with unshaken confidence, on the 
bosom of their Church (or clergy), which must be infallible. 
Christ has promised to be with her (or them) always, even 
to the ending of the world. 

Is not this substantially the same doctrine for which Drs. 
Peck and Hodgson contend ? for whose language I refer you 
to my last letter. Does not Dr. H. agree with the Catholics, 
that Christ gave to his ministers, as a body, the keys, and 
thus divinely authorized them to authoritatively teach and 
govern his Church, promising to ratify their acts, and be with 
them to the end % Is not this the ground of the reason why 
Dr. H. so vehemently asserts " all attempts to prove that the 
power to govern the Church, in whole or in part, belongs to 
the laity, fail utterly '?— P. Ch. Ad. 

" With us ( Methodists) churches have no more right to 
elect their pastors than pastors their churches." " The right 
never existed."— Ch. Pol., p. 127. 

But only look the logical consequences of this prin- 
ciple in the face. Let the Catholic draw the conclusion 
for you. If Christ gave the ministers of the gospel an 
exclusive authority, in virtue of their divine commission, 
to preach the gospel (i. e. declare and expound what 
Christianity is and requires), these ministers alone are 
authorized to say what faith or practice is required from the 
laity. It is utterly contradictory to the theory of a divinely- 
commissioned clergy, that the laity should exercise any pri- 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 249 

vate judgment whatever on any Christian doctrine, institu- 
tion, or practice ; for, to what end or purpose should the 
ministers of the gospel be commissioned by divine authority 
to preach (i.e., expound all Christian truths), if any layman has 
the right also to exercise his private judgment on such sub- 
jects, and to either approve or reject the expositions of those 
who have been divinely commissioned by Christ to expound 
the principles of Christian truth, he also being with them in the 
presence of his Spirit, until the ending of the present world. 

This key power assumption places you side by side with 
the Catholics, involving you deeply as them in the dogmas 
of apostolic succession and infallibility also : for, if you will 
admit that Christ gave a divine commission to his ministry, 
as a body, by which they have an exclusive right, ex-officio, 
to teach and to rule (i. e., to enact, construe, and execute the 
laws, and decide what faith the Church shall hold), he pro- 
mising ever to be with them, and to ratify their acts, then 
vou will also admit that he is so with them some way, as 
to guard them against the enactment of wrong laws, rules, 
and directions, and erroneous decisions and doctrines. 

Do not the laity of your society, as do those of all others 
governed by a body of men as the clergy alone, or the clergy 
and a bench of ruling elders, virtually concede the claim, that 
their clergy or rulers,when in conference or session assembled, 
are infallible, and, therefore, surrender all right to have 
a voice in determining the doctrines they are to believe, 
or the laws to obey and regulations to observe, or whom 
they should fellowship as fellow-members 1 Do they not 
implicitly leave all these, so vitally important, matters, as 
they do all things else, to the arbitrary decision of the clergy, 
their rulers, and thus repose as confidently upon the bosom 
of their ministers as though they believed them as infallible 
as the poor, deluded Catholic does his priests ? If you do 
11* 



250 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

not claim to be infallible, why do you presume to exclude 
a member from your societies^ and one whose piety you will 
attest by a written certificate, simply because he has not im- 
plicitly obeyed a law you have, in the exercise of your 
authority, imposed upon him, or been able to believe a 
doctrine you have prescribed for his creed? 

You are between the horns of a dilemma. You must 
openly assert with Rome, infallibility, as a necessary accom- 
paniment of the power of the keys, or surrender the keys, or 
what is left of them, to the laity. For it is apparent, if you 
have no peculiar grace above the laity, to secure you from 
error in determining doctrine and law, and enable you to 
administer the discipline of the Church, then, in the name of 
right reason, and man's natural rights, come down and allow 
the people to govern themselves in Church relation, by the 
directions of their own proper Master, King, and Lawgiver, 
Jesus Christ. 

But again, just so long as you admit Dr. Hodgson's 
construction of Matt, xviii., so long will you yield the whole 
controversy upon these topics in favor of the Papists, and, 
indeed, upon all the issues between you. Grant your doc- 
trine of the key power, and you must concede the succession, 
and then you are forced to admit that the Romish apostacy 
is the only true Church of Christ, since it is the only reli- 
gious (?) body that has held to these dogmas for 1000 years ; 
and then you can and must grant that all her traditions, as 
sprinkling, pouring, and infant baptism, and images, and cross- 
ings, and penance, and baptismal regeneration, are as proper 
and binding as any thing in Holy Scripture, for they are all the 
enactments of an infallible Church ! Why should Protestants 
adopt and practice some and not all of them 1 

How can Methodists successfully controvert the pretensions 
and resist the encroachments of the papacy with such a mill- 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 251 

stone around their necks ? They cannot, as we shall soon see, 
without being entangled in their words, and thrown into a 
maze of absurdities and contradictions. You cannot assert 
the right of every individual to exercise private judgment in 
all religious matters even, without virtually aiid explicitly 
denying the positions of these grave Methodist doctors, that 
Christ divinely commissioned a body of ministers and their 
successors in office, regularly coming in of course, to rule 
supremely and preach exclusively. You are again forced to 
an alternative, to deny the divine right of your clergy to 
rule — surrender the keys, or deny the laity the exercise of 
private judgment in matters of religion, as the Pope does. 
You practically decide to act with him. Do you allow the 
laity the right to judge in matters of doctrine ? Did you 
ever allow them the liberty to decide what should be 
the articles of their creed ? Who determines the creed — • 
the doctrines Methodists are to believe 1 . Their ministers — 
and they can change them when they see fit. The power and 
right to create implies the power to destroy. Did not the 
last Conference, South, strike out the whole ninth section ? 
Yesterday a pious Methodist could have been cast out of 
Methodism as a vile simmer, for violating that section, but 
to-day the act of yesterday is not the least sinful or immoral. 
Who are so potential as to make the damning sin of to-day 
the virtue of to-morrow but the infallible rulers of Meth- 
odism. 

It is proper and praiseworthy, according to the Discipline, 
for a Methodist to immerse to-day, but after next Confer- 
ence, it may be a sufficient ground for expulsion in disgrace 
from the society. Do you allow your members the right of 
private judgment and the free expression of it, in matters you 
have laid down in the Discipline — rules, and regulations 
purely of your own invention and enactment % By no means— 



252 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

a member could not commit a more mortal sin than to 
inveigh against, or even express his opinion unfavorable to 
the requirements of the Preacher's Testament — the Disci- 
pline ; it commands that such an offender shall be excluded, 
though an eminently pious person. No more do you allow 
them the exercise of their judgments in the discipline — in the 
reception and exclusion of members. Not the shadow of any 
thing that resembles the exercise of private judgment do you 
allow the laity. I ask you — and through you I ask every 
Methodist who dares to think — " Do the Romish clergy 
deny their subjects more than the Methodist clergy deny 
theirs 1 

I have discussed this subject at this length, to make clear 
the operating cause that is leading so many Methodists and 
Episcopalians back into the bosom of the mother Church. 
Says .a learned reviewer of Dr. McCulloh's work on the 
credibility of the Scriptures : 

" But whatever may be the defects or merits of Dr. Mc- 
Culloh's work, I apprehend I have sufficiently shown by 
my preceding remarks, that if Protestants will affirm that 
ministers of the gospel have a divine commission to exer- 
cise ecclesiastical functions, it will be impossible for any 
Protestant who reasons consistently on such a premise to 
avoid joining himself to the Catholic Church. 

We have had, during the past ten or fifteen years, abund- 
ant proof of the correctness of this inference in the history 
of the Church of England. During this period of time, 
nearly two hundred clergymen of that denomination have 
abandoned their living, renounced their friends, and every 
prospect of temporal benefit as ministers of the national 
Church, and have joined themselves to the Catholic Church 
as mere priests in the humblest position and capacity. It 
would be impossible to impeach their disinterestedness or 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 253 

integrity in the case, for the Catholic Church either has no 
rewards to offer them, or at least, has never yet given them 
any thing equivalent to the temporary advantages they had 
renounced. The only explanation, therefore, that can be 
made concerning these remarkable conversions is, that the 
Protestant theory on the subject of the organization and 
constitution of the Church of Christ, if consistently carried 
out, leaves the religious and conscientious Protestant no 
alternative." 

Protestants may never hope to prevail in the coming con- 
flict with the Papacy in this country, until they renounce the 
" power of the keys" — the unscriptural doctrine of the di- 
vine right of the clergy and elders to rule the Church — 
ay, more, until they repudiate the multitude of Romish 
traditions they now sanction and enjoin, and take the Bible, 
and the Bible alone, for their rule of faith and practice. 
Baptists have this battle to fight alone and unaided, and 
even to defend themselves against the various Protestant 
sects in the fight. It is a question of tremendous im- 
port. 

Are Protestant sects prepared successfully to with- 
stand THE INFLUENCE AND POWER OF POPERY, THAT DARKENS 
OUR LAND, AND BOLDLY THREATENS THE ABOLITION OF OUR IN- 
STITUTIONS, AND THE ULTIMATE SUBVERSION OF BOTH OUR FREE 
GOVERNMENT AND OUR RELIGION 1 

We think not, for Protestants are not a unit, — they are 
violently antagonistic— they hate each other with a cruel 
hatred, scarcely less than they differ from and hate Baptists. 
Episcopalians are opposed by Presbyterians and Methodists; 
while Episcopalians and Presbyterians unite in making war 
upon Methodists. Old and New School Presbyterians and 
Congregationalists are each seeking the overthrow and an- 
nihilation of the other, and still, like Pilate and Herod, they 



254 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

will all unite in a league of amity and friendship to oppose 
the influence of Baptists, either in seeking the salvation of 
sinners, or the dissemination of their principles. 

Talk about all these uniting in open communion at the 
Lord's table, in token of Church and Christian fellowship ! 
What impious hypocrisy, what a solemn mockery — a blas- 
phemous farce, to thus prostitute the holy emblems to the 
propagation of a falsehood ! We say Protestants are en- 
gaged in a fierce and deadly conflict among themselves, to 
annihilate each other ; how then can they unite against Po- 
pery? 

But could they unite, wherein can they judge the Catholics 
without condemning also themselves % What principle of 
papacy, save that of idolatry, can they attack without their 
blows recoiling most fearfully upon their own systems and 
practices % 

1. Will they deny that the Roman Catholic Church is a 
Scriptural Church, and denounce her as the " Mystery of In- 
iquity," the " Woman dressed in scarlet, the Mother of Har- 
lots and abominations of the earth V 9 

Cannot Rome justly say, Spare me, my dear children, and 
honor your mother if you would be respected. Do you not 
all call yourselves Protestants and reformed ? You then ad- 
mit yourselves once to have been a part of myself and to 
have proceeded forth from me. Do you not to-day call 
yourselves " branches of the Church ?" Of what Church are 
you branches, but of the Holy Roman Catholic, in which 
you all acknowledge you originated, and from which, as a 
branch from a parent trunk, you confessedly proceed? If 
I, the Catholic Church, am the mother of " harlots" and 
" abominations" of the earth, you are all my children, and 
consequently are those harlots and abominations ! You 
do not well, my daughters, thus to cast reproach upon 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 255 

your parentage. I commend to you the example and 
filialness of your sister, my favorite child, the Episcopal 
Church, which, like a prodigal, is returning to her mother's 
house. 

Could not Rome thus cause the well-aimed blow to recoil 
upon her Protestant children * for they are her legitimate 
offspring, and if she is the mother of abominations and har- 
lots, Protestants are they. If the fountain is corrupt, all the 
waters that flow from it are also corrupt. If the Church of 
Rome is an illegitimate church, they are illegitimate churches 
also. " Either make the tree good, and its fruit good, or else 
make the tree corrupt and its fruit corrupt" (Matt, xii., 23), 
is a principle established by the Great Teacher. 

2. Will they deny her the age she claims — that she was 
founded by Peter, and once presided over by him ? 

They must do this, else Rome stands forth a Christian and 
apostolic church, and besides her there is none other. But 
they deny her claims and charge her with being, from the 
days of Paul, that spirit of Antichrist that worked in the 
early churches, corrupting Christianity ; that it was early 
repudiated by all the pure churches ; that popery had no ex- 
istence in its present form until established by Hilderbrand, 
A.D., 606 ; that no church similar to the Roman Catholic 
was instituted by Christ or his apostles, or existed within 
600 years of their day, and moreover, all the teachings of 
the Scriptures positively forbid the ilea of such a monstrous 
system. 

Cannot Rome reply, " My dear children do you not see 
that you commit suicide by taking such a position to discre- 
dit my claims ! You cannot, with the least regard to reason, 

* Baptists are not Protestants, having never belonged to the Catho- 
lic Church, more than to-day. "Baptists," said Sir Isaac Newton, 
" are the only people that never symbolized with popery." 



256 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

believe that such systems as years existed in the days of the 
apostles, surely, each radically differing' from, and destruc- 
tive of the other ! Did Paul found an Episcopal Church at 
Antioch, a Presbyterian Church at Ephesus, and a Methodist 
one at Philippi % Certainly not. All the churches that were 
founded in the apostles' times were one and identical in doc- 
trine, in organization, ordinances and practices. But you do 
not even claim that you existed in the days of the apostles, 
or were founded by them. I know the parentage of each 
of you, and beheld you when you were born. You, my most 
dutifulChurch of England, are the offspring of my wayward 
and licentious boy, Henry VIII., who was led astray by 
the love of the beautiful Ann Boleyn, A. D. 1534. 
' " You, my Lutheran daughter, by the bold and impetuous 
Martin Luther, A. D. 1525. 

" You, my Presbyterian daughter, by the stern and austere 
Calvin, A. D. 1541 ; while I acknowledge you, dear Metho- 
dists, being all the children of Wesley, by the Church of 
England, (A. D. 1784,) as my legitimate and worthy grand- 
children, and though quite too noisy and fanatical, yet I can- 
not but be quite partial to you, since, next to your mother, 
the Church of England, you possess nearly all my features ; 
indeed, the likeness is striking and remarkable !" 

3. Will Protestants charge the Church of Rome with being 
« mystical Babylon" and that " scarlet woman," drunken 
with the blood of the saints 1 

May not Rome reply, If I am Babylon, because I have 
persecuted and shed the blood of the heretical Anabaptists, 
then do you also belong to Babylon, for which one of you all 
have not imbued your hands in their blood? Tour own 
garments are scarlet and blood-dyed, as well as my own! It 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 257 

becomes us to keep these family matters among ourselves, 
and not charge each other before our enemies.* 

4. Will Protestants denounce Rome for the iniquitous and 
blasphemous assumptions of her clergy of the " divine right" 
to legislate for the Church of Christ, to make, change, or 
abolish, rites and ceremonies, &c. ? 

Do not Protestants claim the same Antichristian 
power 1 See Meth. Discipline, p. 20. " Every particular 
church may ordain, change, or abolish, rites and ceremonies, 
so that all things be done to edification" — of whom 1 The 
rulers are the judges, of course ; they, then, claim to ordain 
or institute, change and abolish, until they are themselves 
perfectly suited, pleased and satisfied ! Is not this claiming 
Antichristian powers ? Does the Pope claim more power % 

Calvin says, " From the beginning, the church has freely 
allowed herself, excepting the substance, to have rites a little 
dissimilar, for some immerse thrice and others only once ;" 
and he therefore abolished immersion altogether, as incon- 
venient, and ordained sprinkling in the room of Christ's ap- 
pointment. He had as good a right to have forbidden bap" 
tism entirely, as to change its action in the least. He did 
abolish Christian baptism and substituted clerical baptism 
instead of it. 

5. Will Protestants protest against the unscriptural orders 
of the Catholic clergy, since Christ made all his ministers 
equal, and only one order 1 But the advocates of Episco- 
pacy, whether Protestant or Methodist, have their three or- 
ders at least, and their inferior and superior ministers. 

6. Will they protest against the irreligious practice of the 



* Read Rev. xviii., 24. " The blood of all the saints is to be found 
in Babylon." If Protestant sects have shed the blood of saints, are. 
they not a part of mystical Babylon ? 



258 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

inferior Catholic clergy of being solemnly sworn to obey rev- 
erently in all things the superior clergy 1 The Methodist 
and Episcopal inferior clergy are compelled to do the same 
thing ! See office for ordination of deacons and elders. 

7. Will they charge the Catholics with blasphemy for 
giving the titles that belong to God to the pontiff, and car- 
dinals and bishops % Are not Episcopalians and Methodists 
guilty of the same sin % See the title given to the late 
Bishop Hedding, in the Methodist preacher.* " The Right 
Reverend Father in God !" This smacks of my Lord God 
the Pope. See titles of the Episcopal clergy. 

8. Will they object to the Pope because he claims the 
power of the keys ? The Protestant clergy claim each the 
same power ! Methodist bishops and elders claim it, and 
Presbyterian ministers and their elders ! 

9. Will Protestant sects attack the Catholics because they 
claim that the supreme visible headship is vested in the Pope 
of Rome, since the visible Church has no earthly head ? But 
they have each a head ! Queen Victoria and her parliament 
is the Head of the Church of England, as Pio Nono and his 
bench of cardinals is of the Catholic. The bishops and Gen- 
eral Conference is the head of the Methodist society, and the 
General Assembly of Presbyterianism, all legislative bodies. I 
should prefer one great grand head to so many little heads ! 

10. Will Protestants object to popery on the ground of 
her traditions? They hold, teach, and practise her most 
pernicious one — that has done Christianity more injury than 
all the other traditions of popery together ! Infant baptism 
is a tradition of " the Church" as well as sprinkling and 
pouring upon for baptism, and Catholics have never failed to 
cast it into *he teeth of Protestants, that while they protest 

* Introduction, p, 6. 



EEPUBLICAXISM BACKWARDS. 259 

against the authority of the Romish Church, they practise 
one of her principal traditions. 

What says Dr. Pise (a priest of the Romish Church, and 
of high standing among that order in New York, second, 
perhaps, to none but Bishop Hughes), in a lecture recently 
delivered in New York : " There are many things believed 
by all Christians at the present day, not to be found in the 
Scriptures. This is true with regard to infant baptism, that we 
and all Christians [pedobaptist] believe in, for there is no 
authority for it in Scripture. We nowhere find that the 
apostles baptized infants, and if it be proper and necessary 
to baptize infants as well as adults, we have no other author- 
ity and must depend entirely on tradition" — of the Church 
of Rome, of course. 

11. Will they denounce popery for its opposition to the 
circulation of the pure word of God, so that every man may 
have every word of the " Word of 1Mb" faithfully translated 
into his own language 1 Protestants, as sects, are bitterly 
opposed to the purest possible version in all languages and 
tongues, and indeed, to-day are giving &pure version to no na- 
tion of earth ! Did they not refuse to circulate the version 
made by Dr. Judson, because it translated every word 1 

So of other versions. 

12. Is not Popery an absolute and tyrannical hierar- 
chy, oppressive to humanity, hostile to its best interests, and 
in its influence opposed to, and destructive of all free insti- 
tutions, as of civil and religious liberty % We have seen 
that the leading Protestant sects are hierarchies or despotic 
aristocracies also. It is a fixed fact, and easy of clearest de- 
monstration, that hierarchical and aristocratical church orga- 
nizations are hostile, in their influence, to republican institu- 
tions, that they insensibly prepare the rising generation to 
favor, if not to seek, a civil government of the same charac- 



260 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

lev. It is admitted that nothing is more dangerous than a 
religious hierarchy or monarchy in a Republic. Is the Ro- 
man hierarchy dangerous, and are the Protestant hierarchies 
less so 1 It is the principle, not the name, for a hierarchy is 
subversive of religious freedom in whose hands soever it 
may be. The time is not far distant when Protestant hie- 
rarchies will be repudiated by all Christians, as the papal is 
to-day. 

13. Will Protestants charge upon the Catholics that they re- 
cognize and support the adulterous union of Church and State, 
telling them that the Church of Christ " is not of this world ?" 

Rome could reply : — You, my daughters, have committed 
harlotry and made yourselves the " abominations of the 
earth" by the same act. Where have you had the power, 
and have not united the State to your churches ? Have not 
Episcopalians done so in England, and all her colonies, and 
did they not retain the union in America so long as possible % 
Have not the Presbyterians in Scotland, and in all the con- 
tinental kingdoms of Europe, as well as Lutherans, and did 
they not do the same thing in the American colonies % I 
could continue this table of identity of principles to double 
the number, did time allow ; but these are sufficient for my 
purpose, to show that the reformation must be radically re- 
formed, and Protestantism itself protested against, before it 
can successfully grapple with the papacy, or deserve to re- 
ceive the countenance of republican-loving, American Chris- 
tians. A democratic religion alone can become the religion | 
of America, unless we, as a nation, are given up of God, and 
the existing republican element is to be overpowered by the 
tremendous counteracting effect of the huge overshadowing 
Papal and Protestant hierarchies, planted everywhere 
throughout the whole land, exerting, as such ever do, the 
greatest power where religion is most corrupted. 



I 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 261 

We a.so see the unfortunate antagonism with all the Pro- 
testant sects, into which we, as Baptists, are brought when- 
ever we attack the principles of Papacy ! Our blows break 
their force upon Protestants ; and Catholic priests smile in 
security behind them, as behind a bulwark. We can only 
reach Romanists through Protestants, for they are entrench- 
ed behind them. Their priests the more securely keep them 
in darkness by directing their attention to the fact that Pro- 
testants hold and practise their traditions, and defend nearly 
all their important principles ! It requires great moral cour- 
age and Christian heroism in Baptists to attack these prin- 
ciples, since they know they will be precipitated into a fierce 
conflict with all Protestant sects, and expose themselves 
to their displeasure, hatred, and often their bitter persecu- 
tions. This ought not so to be. We cannot believe that 
the Saviour ever intended his followers to be thus divided 
and conflicting. We believe there are many precious Christ- 
ians in the Pedobaptist sects, though in great er?°or. We have 
no bitterness, nothing but love in our heart towards them, 
and this leads us to pray for them, and endeavor to convince 
them of their error ; to leave men and follow Christ. They 
should unite with us against the inrolling flood of Catholi- 
cism, if they love their country or the religion of Christ. 
And they cannot do this so long as they hold the distinctive 
principles of the papacy in common with Papists. We be- 
seech them, for the sake of their land and religion, to repu- 
diate these and unite with us upon the word of God, and let 
the Bible, and the Bible alone, be our religion. Let our prin- 
ciples be blazoned upon our banner. 

A pure Bible only, our Prayer-Book, Confession, and 
Discipline. 

No regeneration but by the Holy Spirit and the Word 
of God. 



262 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

No SALVATION BUT BY GRACE. OBSERVING i LL THINGS, 
AND THOSE ONLY, WHICH CHRIST COMMANDED, AND AS HE COM- 
MANDED. 

I protest, I have not noticed the papal features of Protest- 
antism but with the kindest feelings and the purest motives. 
These are the weak points of Protestantism. It is behind the 
age as well as unsupported by the Bible. The reformation 
needs another Luther. Were he once more to direct it, we 
have reason to believe that, with the light of this age, he 
would reform it of every feature of Romanism ; he would 
effect the reformation he so ardently desired in his day, re- 
store to it the primitive immersion of believers, and repub- 
licanize its government. Protestantism is chilled in the 
shadow of the 16th century. It has made no advancement. 
It is still either afraid to trust the people with self-govern- 
ment, or its clergy have become too corrupt to yield up the 
reigns and sceptre of ecclesiastical domination. The 19th 
century has demonstrated the truth of God's word, that man 
is capable of, and created for, self-government, and that it is 
the only form of government that will secure for humanity, 
individually or nationally, in Church or State, the proper in- 
centive to progress, the largest freedom, and the greatest 
happiness. Let Protestantism, then, bow to this fact, and 
grant to its membership the inalienable right which the Cre- 
ator and Redeemer of man vouchsafed him, and which the 
Papal and Protestant clergy have so long and so iniquitously 
usurped and withheld. 

The principle of hierarchism, in Papism or Protestantism, 
while it is opposed to republicanism, offers the greatest dis- 
couragement to original thought, free and unprejudiced in- 
vestigation, unbiased and unrestrained action. It is also, 
like Papism, opposed to the Bible, and a pure Bible alone, 
being the only and all-sufficient rule of faith and practice, for 

■ 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 263 

the masses. It adds a Prayer-Book, or a Confession of Faith, 
or Discipline — a human code of laws — to the divine and in- 
spired Discipline and Statute-Book of the Kingdom of Je- 
sus, — the New Testament. 

But I propose to notice briefly, the unscripturalness of 
this Romish interpretation of the giving of the keys. It is 
evidently figurative, since the Saviour did not give literal 
keys to Peter. 

The expression was doubtless used in allusion to the fact 
that the key was a badge of office, as steward of the house '■> 
or it may allude to the presentation of the key to the young 
doctor of the law. Martin says, — 

" When the Jews made a man a doctor of the law they 
put into his hand the key of the closet in the temple, where 
the sacred books were kept, and tablets to write upon ; sig- 
nifying by this that they gave him authority to teach and to 
explain the Scriptures to the people." — Quoted by A. Clark. 

" Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth" &c. 

This was doubtless borrowed from a phraseology in com- 
mon use at that time. In chapter xviii. 18, the authority to 
bind and to loose is committed to the disciples. 

Dr. Clark says : " This mode of expression was frequent 
among the Jews ; they considered that every thing that was 
done upon earth, according to the order of God, was at the 
same time done in heaven." " The binding and loosing were 
terms in frequent use among the Jews, and they meant bid- 
ding and forbidding, granting and refusing, declaring lawful 
and unlawful." He tells us that this mode of expression 
was used in two senses : first, in doctrine and in judgment, 
concerning things allowed and not allowed in the law; 
secondly, to bind is the same as to forbid or declare to be 
forbidden. 

Dr. Lightfoot remarks'. "When the time was come 



264 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

wherein the Mosaic law, as to some part of it, was to be 
abolished and left off, and as to another part of it was to be 
continued and to last for ever, he granted Peter, here and to the 
rest of the apostles (chap. xv. iii. 8.) a power to abolish or 
confirm what they thought good, and as they thought good ; 
being taught this and led by the Holy Spirit, as if he should 
say, " Whatsoever ye shall bind in the law of Moses, that is 
forbid, it shall be forbidden, the divine authority confirming 
it ; and whatsoever ye shall loose, that is permit or shall 
teach, that is permitted and lawful, shall be lawful and per- 
mitted." Hence they bound, that is forbade circumcision to 
the believers ; eating of things offered to idols, of things 
strangled and of blood, for a time, to the Gentiles ; and that 
which they bound on earth was confirmed in heaven" Many 
other things they loosed and bound by the same authority, the 
Holy Ghost leading and directing them. 

Whatever this power was, it was entrusted to the apostles 
alone, and not to their successors in office, for they had none. 
For Protestants to claim that this passage warrants the doc- 
trine of the divine right of the clergy to the supreme rule 
of the Church is claiming too much, for if this passage proves 
that the clergy are the successors of the apostles in such a 
sense that they are authorized to exercise their prerogative 
to bind and loose, then it proves too -much for your clergy, 
for in John xx. 23, it is added, " Whose soever sins ye remit, 
they are remitted unto them, and whose soever sins ye retain 
they are retained." 

Will you also claim for Methodist preachers the absolute 
and supreme power to forgive sins as well as the supreme 
power to govern the Church? You may as consistently. 
In whatever sense we understand remitting and retaining 
sins, or binding and loosing, those who exercise it needed 
the infallible direction of the Holy Spirit. Hence Jesus, on 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 265 

conferring the authority, breathed on them, and said, Eeceive 
the Holy Ghost, v. 22. 

The power of the keys, as exercised by the apostles, 
doubtless ceased with them. During their ministry all the 
instructions and laws Christ intended for his churches were 
sufficiently unfolded and explained for the observance of 
his followers. He clothed the apostles with this authority 
that we might receive their words as of equal authority with 
his own, since they taught and spake only as they were 
moved by the Holy Ghost. 

But instead of the Scriptures warranting the lofty claims 
of your ministers to rule the Church, they rebuke them, and 
show that they partake of the spirit of Antichrist. Paul 
gave it as one of the unmistakable features of the man of 
sin, that he as " God," i. e., with supreme authority — " sitteth 
in the temple"— house or Church—" of God, showing him- 
self that he is God ;" i. <?., usurping the place and claiming 
the prerogatives of God. Christ taught that he was the 
" head," the " husband," the sole " lawgiver of his Church;" 
but alas ! Catholic Popes and Protestant Ministers all have 
usurped his place, and exercise his authority over his 
Church — if their semi-papal societies can be regarded as his 
churches. 



12 



LETTER XXIII. 

The influence of power and rank upon Ministers of the Gospel 
is pernicious — Promotes ambition, &;c. 

Sir : — This series of letters would be essentially incom- 
plete if I failed to call your attention especially to the perni- 
cious influence of poioer and rank upon ministers of the gospel. 
This, therefore, will be the theme of my present communi- 
cation. I'need not inform you that ministers are men "of 
like passions" and infirmities with other men. They are com- 
pared to vessels, but they are said to be " earthen vessels." 
Alas ! that there is so much about them to remind others as 
well as themselves that they " are of the earth, earthy." I 
think, sir, if you will faithfully examine Matthew 23 : 8-12, 
you will be convinced that Jesus Christ inculcated the doc- 
trine of ministerial parity. He had condemned the vanity 
and ambition of the Scribes and Pharisees, who loved the 
uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the syna- 
gogues, and greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, 
Eabbi, Rabbi. 

The great Teacher said to his disciples, " But be not ye 
called Rabbi : for one is your Master, even Christ ; and all 
ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the 
earth : for one is your Father who is in heaven. Neither be 
ye called masters : for one is your Master, even Christ. But 
he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. And 
whosoever shall exalt himself, shall be abased ; and he that 
shall humble himself, shall be exalted." 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 267 

Defective indeed must be the mental and moral vision of 
the man who does not see that the Lord Jesus, in these 
verses, intended to suppress ministerial ambition and pro- 
mote a feeling of ministerial equality. "All ye are breth- 
ren." " One is your Master, even Christ." This is equiv- 
alent to the expressions, "Ye are all equal ;" — "You have no 
Master but Christ." 

Do you not, sir, agree with me in saying that it would 
have been most fortunate for the interests of Christianity if 
these teachings of Christ had been practically remembered 
from the days of the apostles till now ? How different would 
then have been the records of Church history ! How many 
occurrences which should tinge the cheek of Christendom 
with shame would never have taken place! — How much 
blood would never have been shed, and how many martyr 
fires would never have been kindled ! Then there would 
have been no disgraceful contests about "Peter's keys." 
Rome would never have had a Pope, nor the Greek Church 
a Patriarch. The archbishops of Canterbury and York 
would never have been heard of, and the term bishop, in its 
Methodist acceptation, would never have been applied to J. 
Soule. In how many instances has a forgetfulness of the 
teachings of Christ operated perniciously ! 

But I come directly to the subject of this letter — the in- 
fluence of power and rank upon ministers. You cannot deny 
that the " Discipline" gives great power to Methodist preach- 
ers. From the time they "join Conference" they begin to 
exercise this power. " Circuit-riders," who are sometimes 
referred to as " beardless boys," claim an authority which 
ought to satisfy the ambition of a Romish priest. Your 
friend Dr. Henkle insists that preachers have the right to 
receive members into the Methodist Church. True, he ad- 
mits that they may take the laity into "advisory cooperation," 



268 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

but utterly repudiates the idea that the laity should have 
any " authoritative control" in the matter. He denies, in- 
deed, that the right on the part of the preachers to receive 
members implies (as he admits some had contended) also 
the right to expel them. Both these rights (/), I suppose, are 
often exercised by your preachers. If you say the Discipline 
does not confer them, then it follows that Methodist preach- 
ers have such a thirst for power that they are not satisfied 
with the exuberant authority conferred by the Discipline. 
There is a love of power natural to man, and permit me to 
say that Method istic regulations must cultivate and promote 
that love of power in your preachers. How can it be other- 
wise, while they are men, and not angels ? I know the 
Methodist doctrine of perfection may be referred to, but 
you, sir, must admit that the exemplifications of this doc- 
trine, like angel-visits, are " few and far between." The love 
of power in a circuit-rider or stationed preacher excites aspi- 
rations after the larger power incident to a presiding elder- 
ship, while the possession of the latter power invests the 
office of bishop with strong attractions. What elder does 
not have day-dreams of the glory attendant on the exercise 
of Episcopal authority ? That glory is regarded as the 
greatest distinction known to Methodism. To be a bishop 
in the Methodist sense of the term is considered an unspeak- 
ably higher honor than to be a bishop in the scriptural accep- 
tation of the word. 

It seems to me, sir, that the influence of power and rank 
upon Methodist preachers must be decidedly bad. The 
power and the rank go together. An advance in rank is an 
increase of power. Every step taken from membership in 
Conference to a bishop's seat augments ministerial authority, 
and unites by stronger ties what Reverdy Johnson termed 
the "clerical aristocracy." How frequently, too, is arrogance 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 269 

an accompaniment of power ! And who has not been dis- 
gusted with the arrogance of Methodist preachers ? Who 
has not scornfully smiled at witnessing the airs assumed by 
circuit-riders 1 Presiding elders often manifest a haughty 
disposition, though they have prudence to conceal many 
things which a circuit-rider makes public. Bishops may be 
expected to exercise greater discretion than elders, though 
the power they possess is, in this free country, appalling. A 
bishop may say to one of the inferior clergy, " Go, and he 
goeth," and to another, " Come, and he cometh." He tells 
the elders over what districts of country they shall preside. 
He stations what preachers he pleases, and puts on the " cir- 
cuit" those he thinks best fitted for the business of " riding.'''' 
It may be said that some of the Methodist bishops are very 
humble men. Probably so; and some of the archbishops 
of England have been comparatively humble, and also some 
of the Popes of Rome. Still, it is a great mystery how humble 
men can occupy these positions ! ! However, so far as Metho- 
dist bishops are concerned, the twenty-second of their "Arti- 
cles of Religion" may afford them relief. If I understand 
that article it teaches that what is " not repugnant to the 
word of God," provided it is " ordained and approved by com- 
mon authority," becomes obligatory. You may, for aught 
I know, persuade yourself that the office which you fill in the 
Methodist Episcopal Church South is "not repugnant to the 
word of God," &c, and that, therefore, it is not inconsistent 
with the character of a minister of Christ to accept the offi- 
cial position you occupy. The principle, however, is a 
dangerous one, and as absurd as dangerous. Look at it. A 
reader of the New Testament would never draw the infer- 
ence from its teachings that it is a bishop's duty to preside 
over a large territory, having under him the inferior clergy, 
&c. No ; the conclusion would be that a bishop is identical 



270 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

with a pastor. Very well. It accords with the word of God ; 
then, for a bishop to superintend a congregation, and labor for 
its spiritual improvement. Indeed, where the size of a church 
demanded it, there was doubtless, in apostolic times, a plu- 
rality of bishops. Hence Paul, in taking leave of the Ephe- 
sian elders, calls them overseers (episcopous in the original), 
and writes to the saints at Philippi with the " bishops and 
deacons." A church therefore might have more than one 
bishop ; but for one bishop to preside over a hundred or a 
thousand churches, was a thing unknown to the inspired apos- 
tles of Christ. Do you say, " It is not repugnant to the word 
of God?"- This is like the argument for infant baptism. 
How often has it been contended that it is not, in so many 
words, forbidden ; and on this account it is not wrong to 
practise if? You know, sir, that the Baptist reasoning is, 
that the commission of Christ enjoining the baptism of be- 
lievers virtually prohibits the baptism of infants. And so 
the New Testament references to bishops are such as to pre- 
clude the idea that they at all resemble Episcopalian or 
Methodist bishops. If I have given a correct account of the 
office of bishop, according to the teachings of the Scriptures, 
it follows that the official station you occupy is " repugnant 
to the word of God." It comes directly in conflict with it. 
It practically falsifies the word of God. I ask you, sir, if 
this is not alarming 1 Here is the highest office in the realms 
of Methodism — the office of bishop — to which hundreds of 
thousands of the laity look as the highest earthly distinction, 
inaccessible, indeed, to them, and to which thousands of 
preachers turn their aspiring eyes, and hope that it is among, 
the unknown possibilities of the future that they will be 
bishops of the Methodist Church! And yet, sir, the New 
Testament no more authorizes this office than it does the 
establishment of a telegraphic connection between the moon 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 271 

and the planet Jupiter. All this anxiety is about an offiee 
which the word of God does not sanction. And to what in- 
triguing and electioneering has this anxiety led ! But I forbear. 

There is another respect in which power and rank among 
your preachers must have a bad influence. I allude to the 
fact that they are irresponsible to the people. They rule 
over the people, and, being clothed with authority, they do 
many things they ought not to do. But are they accounta- 
ble to the people ? No. Who appoint the class-leaders % 
The preachers. Who can remove the class-leaders at plea- 
sure ] The preachers. Who nominate the stewards 1 The 
preachers. Who compose the Quarterly Conference ? The 
preachers and their appointees and nominees. Who com- 
pose the Annual Conferences 1 Preachers alone. Who com- 
pose the General Conferences ? Preachers. This looks very 
much like a ministerial aristocracy. Let a preacher be 
guilty of conduct inconsistent with the Christian profession, 
and who is to try him ? Preachers. The laity have noth- 
ing to do in the matter. Your lay members have my pro- 
foundest sympathies, Bishop Soule. Your system reduces 
them almost to ciphers. I wonder that men who have 
American hearts in their bosoms can submit to it. 

I ask you if their irresponsibility to the people does not 
have a bad influence on your preachers 1 Does it not puff 
them up with pride and arrogance 1 Does it not make them 
tyrannical % Have you seen no indications of this sort ? 
What kind of civil rulers do you think we would have, if 
they were released from all responsibility to the people ? I 
know John Wesley abhorred republicanism ; but I ask you 
how you would like a civil tyranny in this country % Can 
you not say with one of the fathers of the Revolution, " Re- 
sistance to tyranny is obedience to God." If you can, in 
reference to civil rulers, how can you tolerate, and in your 



272 THE GKEAT IKON WHEEL. 

official position even exemplify, an ecclesiastical despotism, 
the most oppressive known to Protestant Christendom'? 
You are aware, sir, that the Presbyterians and Episcopalians 
are less tyrannical in their forms of government than the 
Methodists. Go into a Presbytery, Synod, or General As- 
sembly, and you will find laymen as well as clergymen. In 
an Episcopal Convention there are lay as well as clerical dele- 
gates. In a Methodist Annual or General Conference, how- 
ever, not a layman is to be found. The voices of the clergy 
alone are heard. The three departments of your govern- 
ment — legislative, judicial and executive — are in the hands of 
the preachers. And what did the celebrated Bascom say of 
this state of things ? Here is his language, taken from his 
" Declaration of Rights : " 

" A government uniting the legislative, judicial, and execu- 
tive powers in the hands of the same men, is an absurdity in 
theory, and in practice, tyranny. * * * * In a gov- 
ernment, civil or ecclesiastical, w T here the same men are legis- 
lators, administrators, and judges, in relation to all the laws, 
and every possible application of them, the people, whether 
well or ill treated, are in fact slaves ; for the only remedy 
against such despotism is revolt." 

This is strong language, but no stronger than true. If 
Dr. Bascom lived and died in a Church whose government 
he considered a " despotism," I do not know that it is my duty 
to account for it. Protestant Methodists have intimated that 
he probably had assurances that distinguished honors would 
be conferred on him if he would remain where he was. If 
such assurances were given and proved influential, we have 
another proof of the weakness of human nature, and of the 
mischievous effect produced by power and rank upon preach- 
ers of the gospel. 

Look into Church history, sir, and you will see the inci- 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 273 

pient developments of the spirit which generated the Papacy. 
First there was an infringement upon the rights of the laity 
— then ambitious, power-loving clergymen trespassed on the 
rights of their equals in the ministry — city preachers were 
looked up to as superior to those in the towns and country ; 
and thus things went on, step by step, until Eome claimed 
the " Universal Bishop," and Popery stood forth in its re- 
pulsive atrocity. Ministerial ambition led to Popery, and 
the- Methodist form of government cherishes ministerial 
ambition.* 

The following sensible article recently appeared in the 
Boston Olive Branch, a Protestant Methodist paper ; and it 
being from the pen of one who has had extensive experience 
in Methodism, I with pleasure add it as corroborative testi- 
mony : 

"INFLUENCE OF THE METHODIST EPISCOPACY UPON THE 
MINISTRY. 

" Mr. Editor : — It is nearly twelve years since 1 became 
extensively acquainted with the ministry of the Methodist E. 
Church in New-England ; and during that period of time I 
have closely watched the influence of her Church government 
upon the ministry itself. That the influence is bad, is by no 
means problematical to every unprejudiced mind. That it 
destroys that manly independence which should characterize 
every ambassador of Christ, is too obvious to admit of a 
doubt. The ministry generally, instead of acting like free 
men, is trammelled and biased by the influence of bishops 
ana presiding elders. The itinerant ministry feel bound to 
carry out every feature of the system which is recommend- 
ed by those who " lord it over God's heritage," whether it 



This was written by Eld. J. M. Pendleton, of Ky., at our request. 
12* 



274 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

be in accordance with the spirit of Christianity or not. 
Comparatively few, save those who are acknowledged to be 
the "prime ministers" in the Methodist E. Church, can, 
in the emphatic sense of the word, be termed freemen. So 
much succumbing cannot be found in any other ministry as 
in that of the Methodist E. Church ; and the grand secret 
why the ministry is in so much bondage, is because she is 
so entirely dependent upon bishops and presiding elders for 
her support. If an itinerant preacher should fail to carry 
out into practical effect all the dogmas of presiding elders, 
proscription would be the order of the day ; and that min- 
ister who dares to go contrary to the given advice of his 
superiors in office would be marked and remembered in the 
cabinet, and have to suffer himself with his innocent and un- 
offending family, the first opportunity the offended presiding 
elder has to exercise his proscriptive influence. There are 
too many painful instances on record to prove that the spirit 
of proscription is carried out, to admit of doubt for one 
moment on this point. Witness the case of Rev. J. D. 
Bridge, removed from Springfield to Duxbury. The itine- 
rant ministry is generally exposed to any and every injury 
that the bishops and presiding elders may choose to inflict ; 
and not a few feel, too, the power a bishop can wield every 
opportunity he chooses. The itinerant ministry are suffering 
from ecclesiastical despotism every year, more or less ; and 
those who are brought to feel severely the rod of oppression, 
if they speak out and tell the truth on the subject, or seek 
for an asylum anywhere else, are not saved, even then, 
from the " powers that be." Every possible influence is 
used to destroy their ministerial and Christian characters ; 
and to no small extent is their usefulness curtailed. And 
many who have left the Methodist E. Church from disaffeo- | 
tion, have, from the influence that has been exerted against I 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 275 

them, been compelled to retire from the duties of the Christ- 
ian ministry, and enter into secular concerns ; and the ben- 
efits that might otherwise have been realized in the world, 
have been lost." 



LETTER XXIV. 



THE EPISCOPACY AND THE PEOPLE. 

DEDICATED TO AMERICAN METHODISTS. 

The Principles of legitimate Governments — Man's inalien- 
able Rights — They cannot be conceded or alienated without 
Sin — They cannot be usurped without Impiety — What is a 
Tyranny and a Despotism, according to Bishop Bascom ? — 
Methodism 'proven to be a Tyranny, a clerical Despotism, 
Anti- American in its Genius and Tendency — Republican- 
ism backwards — A Neiv Definition of Methodism, and an 
Illustration. 

" It is true to a great extent, that throughout all divisions of the Christian world, 
intellect has taken but comparatively little hold of the subject of religion, and still 
less of the subject of Church government ; and this affords the ministry an oppor- 
tunity of misleading the people." — Bascom. 

"A government uniting the legislative, judicial, and executive powers in the 
hands of the same men, is an absurdity in theory, and in practice ttraxsy." — Ibid. 

Dear Sir :- — Having noticed the influence of Episcopacy 
of ministerial rank and power upon the Methodist ministry, 
I propose to notice briefly how this Great Iron Wheel power 
works down upon the people — how unmitigated its tyranny, 
and how presumptuous in the usurpation of their rights as 
men and Christians — rights that cannot be conceded or alien- 
ated without sin, or usurped without impiety. 

I hold it to be a self-evident truth, that all men were 
created free and equal. Our Creator endowed us with the 

(276) 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 277 

power, and guaranteed unto us, by the charter of our crea- 
tion, the right of self-government, restricted by no statutes 
save those imposed directly by himself; ay, more, he made 
it our duty to preserve this right, and has made its surrender 
or concession an injury inflicted upon our minds, our progress, 
and our happiness, as it is insulting to himself. 

I assert it as an axiom, that it is man's duty to be free. 
and exercise his right of self-government, in all nations and 
under all circumstances, in both Church and State. The 
Gospel of Christ sustains and vindicates to man these inalien- 
able rights ; and, therefore, wherever it fully pervades his 
soul, it makes him everywhere a republican, as well as a 
Christian. Humanity, wherever oppressed, robbed, and 
degraded by the pride, and rapacity, and venality of tyrants 
and usurpers, called kings and emperors, has a right to 
free itself of its oppressors, and rise to the dignity, and 
assert the rights of man. I find these principles stated in 
Bascom's famous <; Declaration of the Eights of Man," from 
which 1 shall quote largely in the present letter. 

" Art. 1. God, as the common Father of mankind, has 
created all men free and equal, and the proper equality and 
social freedom of the great brotherhood of the human race, 
in view of the gifts and grants of the Creator, are to be in- 
ferred from all his dispensations to men. Every man, by 
the charter of his creation, is the equal of his contemporaries 
— the essential rights of every generation are the same. Man, 
as the child of God's creation, continues man immutably, 
under all circumstances ; and the rights of ancestry are those 
of posterity. Man has claims which it becomes his duty to 
assert, in right of his existence, such as the indefeasible right 
of thinking and acting for himself, when thought and action 
do not infringe the right of another, as they never will, when 
truth and justice are made the basis of human intercourse. 



278 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

These rights, common to the great family of man, cannot be 
abolished by concession, statute, precedent, or positive insti- 
tution ; and when wrested or withheld from the multitude 
of mankind by their rulers, may be reclaimed by the people, 
whenever they see proper to do it." 

Man, then, was created a sovereign. The people are, and 
of right ought to be, sovereigns. They cannot with im- 
punity surrender their natural rights. No legitimate civil 
government can call upon them to do so. God is the author 
of no government, civil or ecclesiastical, that denies to man 
the estimable and ennobling gifts of his Creator. In becom- 
ing a member of civil society, the exercise of his rights may 
be slightly modified, but they should not, cannot, without in- 
jury both to himself and to the government, be relinquished. 
His sovereignty must be recognized, and his rights exercised, 
or he becomes mentally imbecilitated and degraded, and the 
government speedily vitiated and a curse. 

For example : While it is the right of the American peo- 
ple to enact directly every law, and give an expression upon 
every public measure connected with the administration of 
this government, they may, to facilitate the legislation of 
the country, modify the exercise of this right, and elect rep- 
resentatives to enact the requisite laws, and devise the pro- 
per measures, subject, however, to be amended or abolished 
by other representatives, in case they are not approbated by 
the people. The great principle is in this case preserved, 
that the voice of the people is the source of all power; 
their representatives and executive are but the servants of 
the people. The power works outward and upward from the 
people ; the supreme power is in their voice. That govern- 
ment in which this power is in the hands of a few — of a par- 
ticular class, as the preachers, not elected by the people, and 
not amenable to them, is a " tyranny in one of its most dan- 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 279 

gerous forms." We quote from Bishop Bascom's work, 
above alluded to : — 

" Art. 2. Man was created for society ; his natural rights 
are adapted to the social state, and under every form of so- 
ciety, constitute properly the foundation of his civil rights. 
When man becomes a member of civil society, he submits 
to a modification of some of his natural rights, but he never 
does, he never can, relinquish them. He concedes the ex- 
ercise of these rights, for his own and the general good, but 
does not, cannot cast them off. His rights receive a new 
direction, but do not terminate; and that government which 
deprives man of rights, justly claimed in virtue of his crea- 
tion, and interwoven with the constitution of his nature and 
the interests of society, denies to him the gifts of his Creator, 
and must be unjust. God can be the author of no govern- 
ment, contravening the wisdom of his arrangements in the 
creation of men. 

"Art. 3. In every community there is a power which 
receives the denomination of sovereignty — a power not sub- 
ject to control, and that controls all subordinate powers in 
the government. Now, whether this power be in the hands of 
the many or a few, it is indubitably certain, that those mem- 
bers only of the community are free, in whom the sovereign 
power resides. The power of a community is essential to 
its freedom, and if this power be confined to a few, freedom 
is necessarily confined to the same number. All just gov- 
ernment must be founded upon the nature of man, and 
should consult alike the natural rights, civil wants, and moral 
interests of his being. All rightful authority is founded in 
power and law; all' just power is founded in right, and as 
one man's natural right to the character of lawgiver is, to 
all intents, as good as another's, it follows, that all legitimate* 
law must have its origin in the expressed will of the many. 



280 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

" Art. 4. As all men are essentially equal, in their rights, 
wants, and interests, it follows from these, that representa- 
tive government is the only legitimate human rule to which 
any people can submit. It is the only kind of government 
that can possibly reconcile, in any consistent way, the claims 
of authority with the advantages of liberty. A prescriptive 
legislative body, making laws without the knowledge or 
consent of the people to be governed by them, is a despot- 
ism. Legislators without constituents, or peers and fellows 
deputing them as their representatives and actors — thus con- 
stituting themselves a legislature beyond the control of the 
people — is an exhibition of tyranny in one of its most dan- 
gerous forms. In the momentous affairs of government, 
nothing should be made the exclusive property of a few 
which by right belongs to all, and may be safely and ad- 
vantageously used by the rightful proprietors. The justice 
of every government depends essentially upon the original 
consent of the people ; this privilege belongs to every com- 
munity, in the right of the law of nature ; and no man or 
multitude of men can alter, limit, or diminish it. Constitu- 
tional law is an expression of the will of the people, and 
their concurrence in its formation, either personally or by 
representation, is essential to its legitimate authority." 

Every just or legitimate government is founded upon, 
and restricted and controlled by, a constitution created or 
adopted by the people, and in that instrument the sovereign 
rights of the people are distinctly recognized and called into 
exercise. In civil governments, the constitution is the act 
of the people asserting their natural rights, and securing 
themselves against the chances of maladministration. All 
republican governments are based upon constitutions ; ab- 
solute governments, tyrannies, and despotisms have none ; 
for, says Bascom, — 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 281 

" Art. 5. No community can be said, without mockery, 
to have a constitution, where there is a consolidation of the 
different powers of government in the hands of the same 
men, and the remaining portion are left, of course, without 
any security for their rights. Such a case presents an abso- 
lute government ; a government of men, not principles. 
A constitution is not the creature of government; the na- 
ture of things renders it impossible that it should be an act 
of government. In strict propriety, it exists anterior to gov- 
ernment ; — government is based upon, proceeds from, and 
is the creature of, the constitution. A constitution contains 
the elements and principles of government, and fixes the 
nature and limits of its form and operations, but is an in- 
strument distinct from government, and by which govern- 
ment is controlled. It is a preliminary act of the people, in 
the creation of government. It sustains to government the 
same relation that laws do to the judiciary ; the latter is not 
the source of law, cannot make laws or annul them, but is 
subject to and governed by law. A constitution recognizes 
the rights of the people, and provides for their assertion and 
•maintenance. It settles the principles and maxims of gov- 
ernment. It fixes the landmarks of legislation. It is the 
sovereign voice of the people, giving law and limit to them- 
selves and their representatives. 

" Art. 6. A government uniting the legislative, judicial, 
and executive powers in the hands of the same men, is an 
absurdity in theory, and in practice, tyranny. The execu- 
tive power, in every government, should be subordinate to 
the legislative, and the judicial independent of both. When- 
ever, therefore, it happens that these three departments of 
government are in the hands of the same body of men, and 
these men not the representatives of the people — first making 
the laws, then executing them, and finally the sole judges 



282 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

of their own acts, there is no liberty ; the people are virtu- 
ally enslaved, and liable to be ruined at any time. In a gov- 
ernment, civil or ecclesiastical, where the same men are 
legislators, administrators, and judges, in relation to all the 
laws, and every possible application of them, the people, 
whether well or ill treated, are in fact slaves; for the only 
remedy against such a despotism is revolt. No constitution 
can be presumed a good one, embodying the principles of 
correct government, which does not sufficiently guard 
against the chances and possibility of maladministration. 
All absolute governments owe their character to the manner 
in which they are administered, whereas, in a representative 
government, with proper checks and balances, it is the in- 
terest, even of the vicious, to promote the general welfare, 
by conforming to the laws. The greater the equality estab- 
lished among men by governments, the more virtue and 
happiness will prevair ; for where the voluntary consent of 
the governed is the basis of government, interest and duty 
combine to promote the common weal." 

In all the churches of Christ, which are governments, the 
New Testament is the constitution, containing all the prin- 
ciples upon which governments are to be based, and its 
laws and discipline administered. And since the constitu- 
tion determines the form and character of the government 
based upon it, therefore the New Testament must, with 
sufficient clearness, determine the form of government Christ 
intended for his churches. In that sacred constitution, the 
Christian's and humanity's "Magna Charta," all man's in- 1 
alienable rights as a man and. a Christian are asserted and 
vindicated to him, and the most terrible woes thundered 
upon the ears of all Kabbis and masters who may presume 
to enslave them. 

" Art. 9. The New Testament furnishes the principles, ! 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 283 

but not the forms of Church government; and in the adaptation 
of forms to these principles, Christian bodies should be gov- 
erned mainly by the few facts and precedents furnished in 
the apostolic writings. The will and mind of the Great 
Head of the Church on this subject, so far as clearly revealed, 
whether by express statute or fair implication, cannot be 
contravened without impiety ; but in relation to a variety 
of topics connected with the internal police and external 
relations of the Church, on which the Scriptures are silent, it 
is left to every Christian community to adopt its own regu- 
lations, and the same is true of nations. Ministers and pri- 
vate Christians, according to the New Testament, are 
entitled to equal rights and privileges — an identity of 
interests implies an equality of rights. A monopoly of 
power, therefore, by the ministry, is a usurpation of the 
rights of the people. J$o power on the part of the ministry 
can deprive the people legitimately of their elective and 
representative rights ; as the ministry cannot think and act 
for the people in matters of principle and conviction, so 
neither can they legislate for them, except as their author- 
ized representatives. 

"Art. 10. The government of every Christian Church 
should be strictly a government of principle, in relation to 
the governed; and. every private Christian is as deeply 
and reasonably interested as the ministry. Dominion over 
conscience is the most absurd of all human pretentions. 
The assumption that absolute power in the affairs of 
Church government is a sacred deposit in the hands of 
the ministry libels the genius and charities of the New 
Testament." 

Christ most energetically forbade his disciples the right to 
surrender or to concede the exercise of the right to have an 
equal voice in the administration of the government and dis- 



284 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

cipline of his Church. He distinctly and imperiously com- 
manded them neither to submit to or acknowledge authorita- 
tive rulers, for such were the Jewish Rabbis, and masters, 
and teachers, though they were their own ministers, who 
should seek to usurp their rights. To yield the government 
of Christ's Church into the hands of such, is, therefore, a 
sin against the blessed Saviour ; for it is a direct and open 
violation of his express command. It is a matter, then, of 
vast moment what form of Church government we recog- 
nize and support — of as great moment as sin against Christ. 
The man who wilfully or willingly violates this injunction of 
the Saviour, sins as heinously as he who blasphemes his 
name. It is a solemn and weighty matter to decide what 
form of Church government we will recognize and support. 
And it is a sin of no common turpitude for professed min- 
isters to usurp the rights of Christ's children, and assert abso- 
lute jurisdiction in tht affairs of Church government, exer- 
cising supreme legislative, judicial, and executive powers ; 
and thus converting the churches of Christ into seats of 
power and corruption, and unmitigated tyrannies, for their 
own aggrandizement, oppressing his children by thus daring 
to exercise authority and lordship over them. The King of 
Zion, who will terribly judge the impious usurpers of his 
throne, thus solemnly warns them : 

" Neither be ye called masters, for one is yours, and 
all ye are brethren" (therefore only the equals of each 
other and your brethren). 

" Ye know they that are accounted [appointed] to rule 
over the Gentiles, exercise lordship over them, and their great 
ones exercise authority upon them. But so it shall not be 
among you." Is not this authoritatively explicit? Did 
Christ intend that there should be a class of authoritative 
rulers of " great ones" in his Church, to exercise lordship 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 285 

over, and authority upon, his disciples — chief ministers to dic- 
tate to and govern inferior ones — bishops having power to 
say to hundreds and thousands of Christ's ministers, go 
when and where they please — and they must go, or be cast 
out of the Church — and to come at their sovereign beck and 
call ] Did not Christ positively forbid it % Is it not an 
open and insulting violation of the Saviour's express com- 
mand ? I am but an humble disciple of the blessed Saviour ; 
but, if I know my own heart, I love him — love his honor, love 
his cause and kingdom ; and I beg of you to beware that 
you do not violate this solemn injunction. Do you say," We 
bishops and presiding elders are the benefactors of our people, 
because we take all concern for the government off their hands 
and miuds, and leave them nothing to do but to pray and to 
give their money % and we are the benefactors of the world, 
because we send our ministers to preach to it V Then, hear 
the Saviour — " The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship 
over them, and they that exercise authority are called bene- 
factors ; but ye shall not be so." 

In view of these and other explicit commands of Christ, I 
am forced to conclude, with your own Bascom, that to 
assert and teach that such dangerous prerogatives are guar- 
anteed to a privileged class, as ministers in the Church of 
Christ, is to " libel the genius and charities of the New Tes- 
tament ;" and that it is impiety in Christians to concede 
such prerogatives to their ministers, as it is for ministers 
to usurp and exercise them ; for, 

" Art. 10. Whenever a Christian people place themselves 
under a ministry who claim the right of thinking and decid- 
ing for them in matters of faith and morality, they are guilty 
of impiety, however unintentional, to the great Head of the 
Church, inasmuch as it is required of every Christian to re- 
flect and determine for himself, in all cases, and the duty 



286 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

cannot be performed by another. And those ministers who 
aim at a principality of this kind, in the personal concerns 
of faith and practice, are plainly guilty of usurped dominion 
over the rights and consciences of the people." 

I ask not your people now if they be Americans, if 
they be freemen ; but if they be Christians, if they love or 
fear the Saviour, how dare they reject. Christ as their only 
master, and recognize and support your unscriptural jurisdic- 
tion over them 1 And I most fervently pray God that they 
may be brought to reflect upon this matter. 

The principles of your system, developed above, lay at the 
threshold of my opposition to Methodism, driving as they 
do directly against the supreme authority of Christ over his 
Church, and violating his express and solemn commands. 

But there are numerous specifications involved in, and 
positive evils growing out of, the workings of the system. 

And 1st, Methodism is degrading to your people. You 
train them from the first day of their probation to submit 
to the absolute dictation. of Methodist preachers in all reli- 
gious matters, to believe what they bid them, i. e., every 
thing contained in the Discipline — and to do what they bid 
them to do — and almost to think their thoughts. 

Every process through which the subject passes, and the 
whole economy under which he is kept, and by which he is 
turned into one of Mr. Cookman's spindles, to be turned 
around every day by the class-leader, are degrading to the 
man. The people are deprived of the exercise of thought 
and deliberation, and concern and responsibility in matters 
of Church government, while to their faith, their thought and 
conscience, the Book of Disci]Dline is as the Procustian bed. — 
and to its exact dimensions they must contract or be 
stretched. This pledge is exacted from the members at the 
threshold. See Discipline, Part I., Sec, 2. 



KEPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 287 

All absolute governments of this character, ever have, 
everywhere do, and always must, degrade, enervate and im- 
becilitate their subjects. Of this feature Dr. Bascom clearly 
says : — ■ 

" It should not be overlooked, moreover, that when the 
ministry are considered by the laity as the sole judges and 
depositories of faith and discipline, the people lose the only 
powerful motive, the only direct incentive, they can possibly 
have to inquire and decide for themselves, in the infinitely 
momentous concerns of truth and duty. Such a monopoly 
of power by the ministry tends directly to mental debase- 
ment, consequent indecision of character, insincerity, and 
misguided zeal. 

"Art. 15. Governments a fixed and stable cause in the 
progress of human affairs, is finally productive of a large 
amount of good or evil ; it is strictly, in its operation, a moral 
cause, in the formation of character; for it necessarily 
presents circumstances and considerations, in the light of rea- 
sons and motives, which lead to results in the formation of 
character, that become habitual and permanent. The good 
of all concerned, therefore, should be the object proposed 
in the adoption of any form of government ; and when a 
system of government is adopted which calls off the atten- 
tion of the governed from the general welfare, by depriv- 
ing them of all control in the enactment and execution of 
the laws, the natural and unavoidable tendency of a govern- 
ment of this description, is vicious and demoralizing ; and 
such are the character and influence of all non-elective govern- 
ments. The members of a community who place themselves 
under the exclusive control of a few irresponsible persons 
as their sole masters in matters of government, thus tamely 
depriving themselves of the right of representation, and 
even of existence, except by expatriation, betray a criminal 



288 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

negligence of their best interests, and great inattention to 
the general welfare ; and all governments recognizing such a 
distinction, contravene necessarily the influence of enlighten- 
ed conviction and independent inquiry." 

You deny to man the greatest boon of freedom — liberty 
of thought, of speech, and the press, tvhich is his right by 
creation, by regeneration, and by the charter of American free- 
men. You bind him to your Book of Discipline, and then 
put him in connection with the wheel power. If he thinks 
differently from that book — if he objects to any one of its 
teachings — if he discover the effects of the wheel movement 
to be pernicious, " to grind him tremendously," and deprecates 
it to his friends around his own fireside, or if he protests 
against it and seeks to rectify it, he violates his vow — he has 
infracted one of the capital laws of the realm, and is obnox- 
ious to discipline, and if he repents not, to exclusion and dis- 
grace, if not ruin. 

lie may cordially adopt the doctrine of justification by 
faith only, without works, as set forth in Article IX., w T hich 
precludes the possibility of the idea of the ultimate apostacy 
and ruin of a true believer. I say he may cordially receive 
this doctrine as set forth in your articles, and yet, as cordi- 
ally abominate and repudiate the construction which you 
and your ministers put upon this article, and which passes 
for current Methodism, i. e., that a true believer may fall 
from the grace of regeneration and be re-regenerated and 
fall again and again, and be as often regenerated over, or 
fall and be lost for ever. Should he do so, and should he 
speak his thoughts, (for of what practical utility to me or the 
world are my thoughts unless I can speak or write them ?) — 
if he gives utterence to his dissent publicly or privately, and 
if it reaches the ears of the informers the class-leaders, or of 
the minister in charge he is at once arraigned for inveighing 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 289 

against the doctrines and discipline of the Church, and if he 
does not confess his sin (?) in thus exercising his inalienable 
right as a man and a Christian, and promise implicit submis- 
sion and silence in future, he must be cast forth as unworthy 
of a lot among Methodists — stained in character, and injured 
in business. Here is the law that virtually forbids freedom 
of speech : " If any member of our Church shall be clearly con- 
victed of endeavoring to sow dissensions in any of our socie- 
ties by inveighing against p. e., dissenting from and speaking 
against] either our doctrines or discipline, such person so of- 
fending shall be first reproved by the senior minister or preach- 
er of his circuit, and if he persists in such pernicious prac- 
tices, he shall be expelled from the Church." He may have 
violated no command of Christ ; indeed, may have spoken 
according to the sacred oracles in all he said ; yet, if contrary 
to the Bible of Methodism, the Book of Discipline, he must be 
cast headlong out of the Church of Christ (if Methodism be 
a Church of Christ and not simply Mr. Wesley's scheme, as 
Methodist writers frankly admit, and Baptists generally be- 
lieve). Is a Methodist then allowed to think freely, to speak 
his thoughts fearlessly, to investigate, to discuss, to write, 
unless all his thoughts and words square with the " clerical 
measure V But where can he print his thoughts ? The Metho- 
dist press is in the hands of the travelling ministers ; they and 
they only are allowed to edit or control it. Should they print- 
elsewhere, they are amenable to their masters for every sen- 
tence, as are the preachers to their " chief ministers." 

See the law : "Any travelling preacher who may publish 
any work or book of his own, shall be responsible to his 
Conference for any obnoxious matter or doctrine therein con- 
tained."— Dis. p. iii, chap. vi. § 21. 

Who iudge what mav be considered " obnoxious matter 
or doctrine V His chief ministers ; and their decision is ab- 
13 



290 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. 

solute. If a member is the offender who is judge of what 
is to be considered obnoxious 1 The ministers, or whom they 
may see fit to appoint. Here is the crushing power of the 
wheel. Who can tell what may be considered obnoxious to 
the judges'? This principle is grossly anti- American, and is 
the essence of despotism. 

Compare the above law of Methodism with the following 
in the Declaration of Rights adopted by our Continental 
Congress : 

" Declaration of Rights. — Resolved, That the people 
have a right peaceably to assemble, consider of their griev- 
ances, and petition the king ; and that all prosecutions, pro- 
hibitory proclamations, and commitments for the same are 
illegal." 

You deny the people the liberty of the press. How do the 
despots of Rome, of France, of Austria, of Russia, control 
the press so that not one word shall appear that is not favor- 
able to the iniquitious powers of the throne, and iniquitous 
administration of those powers % By a law similar to that 
adopted by the rulers of Methodism. Every editor in the 
realm is either appointed by the throne, or every man who 
writes, and every editor who publishes, matter that is deemed 
obnoxious to the censors appointed by the ruling powers, is 
liable to rigorous punishment. What is the result in these 
countries 1 what must be the result in any country under 
such a suppression of speech and the press ? A gagged press 
— degradation of mind, of man— oppression — slavery ! Can 
it be less so in the kingdom of Methodism 1 Do not the 
bishops assume to themselves the appointment of every 
editor of the whole realm ? And therefore every Methodist 
paper is a court journal. Do you not deny the eligibility 
of a layman — of a private member, to the office of editor 
of any one of all your papers ? You do. I assert what 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 291 

every intelligent man may know, that freedom of thought, 
of speech, and the press, is not more stringently and thor- 
oughly suppressed in the empire of the Pope, or the Czar, than 
in the dominions of Episcopal Methodism. A late spirited 
writer justly says : 

"Episcopal Methodism is anii- American in its direct tend- 
ency to suppress freedom of speech and of the press. That 
this is its tendency, no one acquainted with the system 
can consistently deny. Let a number of members of an 
Episcopal Methodist society express their conviction that the 
government of their Church might be bettered ; let them 
print their views and circulate their opinions and excommu- 
nication is the penalty at once, either for orally discussing 
the matter, or printing their views. Suppose the press was 
under the control of Episcopal Methodism, it could not utter" 
a sentiment at variance with the " Discipline" without being 
placed under interdict. A Methodist preacher cannot — dare 
not publish a book that shall encourage free inquiry into 
Episcopacy, or that will induce discussion of its merits, 
without the fear of exclusion. Now, how does Rome prevent 
the freedom of the press where she has not political power % 
By this bugbear of excommunication. Place the free press 
of America under the control of Methodist Episcopal bishops, 
and there could be no free discussion — Republicanism would 
be strangled, and the car of Liberty rolled backward. The 
Methodist Episcopal press now is under the control of the 
bishops — the editors of all the papers, magazines, books, 
tracts, etc., etc., are appointed by the Conference, with the 
approbation of the presiding bishop. 

" If I am an American I must forget it in becoming an Epis- 
copal Methodist. If I love republicanism, I must not ex- 
press my preference for it in the government of the Church 
of which I am a member. Freedom of speech is denied 



292 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. 

me on pain of exclusion. To speak of republicanism in 
Church government is to " sow dissension," and that is to be 
punished with excommunication. Americanism encourages 
freedom of speech ; Episcopal Methodism suppresses it : it 
is, therefore, anti-American." 

But I love the burning thoughts of your own Bascom. I 
have said that the withholding of these inalienable rights of 
freedom, and which it is the imperative duty that Christian- 
ity enjoins upon all men to exercise, tends to degrade the 
people. 

" Where all the power and forms of government are held 
and managed by a few, who act without delegated right by 
consent of the people, the authority of the rulers is absolute, 
and the people are disfranchised of all right in the various 
relations existing between them as subjects and those who 
hold the reins of government. Such a government must 
always lead to mental debility, will depress the moral vigor 
of a people, and necessarily abridge the liberty of reasoning 
and investigation." 

Methodism is not a school of republicanism, in which the 
children of this generation are taught and trained to be the re- 
publicans of the next, and inflamed with all the glorious senti- 
ments of freeborn and Christ-born republicans, as the Church 
of Christ is — but it is teaching the sons of the people that it is 
right and duty to concede those rights in the Church to their 
ministers, and consent tamely and servilely to be taxed and 
ruled without the privilege of representation. It is therefore 
moulding the character of American children into monarch- 
ists — into concessionists and submissionists to tyrants — into 
believers in the divine right of kings, and ministers, and 
bishops ! It is preparing them to be ruled by a king. It 
was a favorite aphorism with James I., " No bishop, no king." 
No episcopacy, n> v throne. Episcopacy is the right arm, the 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 293 

handmaid of monarchy. It was designed to mould the peo- 
ple to take and wear the yoke of monarchy. Well might 
the persecuting Laud say, " If these Anabaptists succeed in 
plucking down the throne of the bishops, the thrones of kings 
will fall with them." Does not government insensibly mould 
the character of the governed % 

"Art. 15. Government, as a fixed and stable cause in the 
progress of human affairs, is finally productive of a large 
amount of good or evil ; it is strictly, in its operation, a moral 
cause in the formation of character ; for it necessarily pre- 
sents circumstances and considerations, in the light of rea- 
sons and motives, which lead to results in the formation of 
character, that become habitual and permanent. The good 
of all concerned, therefore, should be the object proposed 
in the adoption of any form of government ; and when a 
system of government is adopted which calls off the atten- 
tion of the governed from the general welfare, by depriv- 
ing them of all control in the enactment and execution of 
the laws, the natural and unavoidable tendency of a govern- 
ment of this description is vicious and demoralizing ; and such 
are the character and influence of all non-elective governments. 

"Art. 16. Any government that does not allow the people 
to meet, deliberate, and decide upon matters that concern 
themselves, is evidently oppressive. For those who are not 
the representatives of the people to make laws for them, 
and then deny them the freedom of candid inquiry and hon- 
est animadversion, is a measure as irrational as it is unjust. 
The maxim which assumes that the ministry have a right to 
rule and dictate exclusively in the great concerns of religion, 
is the fruitful source of implicit faith, which tamely, and 
without inquiry, receives instruction at the hands of men, as 
authoritative and final — impiously receiving ' for doctrines, 
the commandments of men. and perverting the oracles of 



294 THE GREAT IROX WHEEL. 

God.' When the ministry judge and determine for the peo- 
pie, without their legitimate concurrence, as matter of right, 
conformity becomes a question of policy, instead of result- 
ing from conscience and principle. A government which 
denies to the governed the right to inquire, remonstrate, 
and demand withheld justice ; which, from its structure and 
operation, is calculated to darken the understanding and mis- 
lead the judgment ; and thus compel obedience to its mea- 
sures in the great interests of right and wrong, must be es- 
sentially unjust, and ought not to be submitted to." 

1 have already made this letter too long, without enume- 
rating a moiety of the rights you have usurped from the 
people. 

You tax the people, and yet deny them the right of repre- 
sentation. Taxation without representation is an oppressive 
form of tyranny. Methodist ministers fix their own salarie3 
as pastors, as agents, as editors, &c, &c, to the end of the 
chapter. They decide what religious interests they will sup- 
port, and how much money shall be devoted to each, and 
how much money shall be raised from the people of each 
circuit or district. The preachers fix the amount the peopl° 
have to pay, and say boastingly, v Protest if you dare." 

"At the late annual meeting of the American Board, Dr. 
Durbin is reported to have described the manner in which 
the Missionary Board of the Methodist E. Church treat the 
question of funds, in the following language : 

" 'They do not inquire, he said, what their churches are 
able or willing to contribute. They simply make an esti- 
mate of the amount needed to carry on their mission ; for 
this amount they draw upon the churches, and say to them? 
' Protest it, if you dare.' " — Zion Herald. 

They have the entire money power of their Church in their 
own hands, and use it without regard to the wishes of the 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 295 

people, or without being amenable to them for the manner 
of its disbursement. 

The Methodist clergy are a monied monopoly, and possess 
far more temporal power than the Catholic clergy of this 
country, and this is a dangerous feature to American republic- 
anism. 

" Why is it that we fear Romanism ? Not simply be- 
cause the votaries of the Pope yield assent to the ridi- 
culous superstitions of their debasing religion. Not simply 
because their priests and bishops exercise oppressively an 
assumed power. This last feature is anti-American in 
Romanism as well as in Episcopal Methodism ; but this 
does not trouble us. If Romanists or Methodists choose to 
degrade themselves by submission to priests or bishops, and 
voluntarily sacrifice that liberty which, as freemen, they have 
a right to enjoy, it is their own fault. But the supporting of 
assumptions to temporal power is just cause of alarm. The 
effort of Romish bishops to gain the control of all the Cath- 
olic Church property, has been loudly decried, and some 
noble instances have occurred where even Roman Catholic 
congregations have determined, in the exercise of their free- 
dom as American citizens, to resist these arrogant demands. 
But it seems to be forgotten that Episcopal Methodist bish- 
ops make the same demand, and this demand is submitted 
to without a murmur by American Methodists. "Who hold 
the deeds for every inch of ground, and every Episcopal 
Methodist church in the land ? The Conference, alias, the 
bishops. Where is the Methodist Episcopal congregation 
that has dared to follow the example of the Roman Catho- 
lic congregations above alluded to, in opposing this arrogant 
assumption of temporal power? Let Americans in the 
Episcopal Methodist Church blush to be told that, with all 
their boasted intelligence and freedom, they fear excommu- 



296 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL, 

nication from their bishops more than Roman Catholics 
fear the Pope's nuncio, or the bulls of Pio Nono himself. 

" A vast amount of property is thus held under the control 
of Methodist bishops. A lay member of the Church has 
no voice in the disposition of funds which he himself aided 
to raise. The preachers can dispose of it only by suggest- 
ing the way in which it may be appropriated. The bishops 
control it, and may designate it as they see fit. 

" Now, is there no danger to American liberty from a hier- 
archy possessing such ample pecuniary resources as these ? 
Are the bishops of the Episcopal Methodist Church so imma- 
culately pure as to be beyond the reach of selfish and secta- 
rian prejudices % May the time not arrive when they will 
consider it to be their duty to use their vast influence and as- 
sumed power in politics ? May they not conclude that they 
will be doing God service by using their influence to induce 
political action which will favor Episcopal Methodism ? The 
support which they see the lay members of their churches 
giving to their assumptions of temporal as well as spiritual 
power, has a direct tendency to encourage them to exercise 
that power in controlling the affairs of the State for their own 
advancement, and so as to secure the continuance of their 
power unmolested. The man who can see and feel it right 
to exercise a bishop's office in the Episcopal Methodist Church, 
can scarcely see it wrong to exercise a monarch's office in the 
State, for both are alike, and equally anti-American."* 

You deny the people the privilege and right to hold the 
meeting -houses they have built with their own money. You 
deny them the right to appoint the trustees who shall hold 
their chapels in trust for them. You and your fellow-bish- 
ops hold the keys of all the Methodist chapels, meeting- 

* J. Q. Adams. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 297 

houses in America, and you can lock them up to-morrow so 
that no one could open them. You can excommunicate all the 
churches in a county or State, should they displease you — 
disobey your wishes, and deprive them of their ministers, 
and consequently of the ordinances of religion, the baptism 
of their children, until they returned to your episcopal juris- 
diction and allegiance ! Could the Pope of Rome do more % 
He was wont to do the like of this, and you can do it. 

You deny the people their right to invite whom they wish 
to" preach in houses they have built with their own money. 
Jf all the members of any given society should wish a cer- 
tain minister, who may have made himself obnoxious to the 
Episcopal displeasure by showing the unscripturalness and 
anti-republican principle of Episcopacy, to preach one ser- 
mon for them — they could not, all together, give him the 
house to preach in, unless the chief ministers, the rulers, saw 
fit. 

You deny your members their inalienable right to elect their 
own preachers. 

You deny the existence of the right. You call for proof. 
I answer : — The people are sovereigns. They are masters 
rather than slaves. They, at least, are commanded to call 
no man, be he pope or bishop, master ; and therefore that man 
or potentate or clerical power is not in legitimate existence 
that has the right to set over the churches of God whomsoever 
he pleases for a pastor, and displace them when he pleases, 
in total disregard of the expressed wishes of the people. 

That the general Conference can by a vote withdraw its 
jurisdiction from half a nation was illustrated by the act of 
that body, in 1844, and the despotic powers of the Confer- 
ence established by the admission of the counsel and the de- 
cision of an American court ! A writer places both facts 
in a strong light. 



298 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

" All the Conference did towards a division was to agree 
that if the Southern brethren found it necessary to organize 
separately, they would withdraw their jurisdiction from such 
portion as choose to belong to the Southern organization. 
This they had a right to do, for they have power to withdraw 
their jurisdiction from any portion of their field of labor, at 
any time they please, from any Conference, district or station. 
The government is with the ministry ; they take the people 
under their jurisdiction, and they can withdraw that jurisdic- 
tion when they please, and it has often been done on a small 
scale. The bishops appoint the preachers, and by their ap- 
pointment the preachers acquire their jurisdiction in their 
respective localities, but let the bishops decline to appoint a 
preacher to a given circuit or station, and leave its name out 
of the minutes, which they have power to do, and the work 
of jurisdiction is done. Bishop Hedding once told St. Paul's 
Church, at Lowell, Mass., that he could not appoint a preach- 
er to serve them, on account of some objectional resolu- 
tions they had adopted. The Church was afterwards pro- 
nounced out of the jurisdiction of the Methodist Episcopal 
Church, by a public proclamation, issued by the preacher 
that had been appointed to the charge. Was there not a 
withdrawing of jurisdiction in this case 1 The plan of sepa- 
ration was also a withdrawal of jurisdiction on the part of 
the Methodist Episcopal Church, and if it was on a larger 
scale, it was done in a less objectionable manner. 

" But they are placed in an unpleasant position ; to save 
their funds they have submitted their church polity to the 
examination and decision of a court, and that court has pass- 
ed upon it, and decided that the General Conference acted 
within its lawful powers in adopting the plan of separation. 
They opposed this decision on the ground that for the Gen- 
eral Conference to possess such power is despotic and dam- 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 299 

gerous, and we agree with them in this conclusion. But the 
Conference did adopt that plan. If they did it lawfully, as 
the court has decided, they possess despotic and dangerous 
power, according to their own admission ; but if they did it 
unlawfully, then the General Conference of 1844 performed 
a despotic and unlawful act, for which there is no redress 
under any constitutional provision, and which a civil court 
has failed to correct, and what they have done once they can 
do again, whenever occasion shall arise. They may take 
which horn of the dilemma they please." 

Yet this iniquitous power you claim and exercise. You 
possess unlimited power over both preachers and people. 

" No appeal can be made from the bishop's designation 
of a preacher to his field of labor. The preacher may not 
wish to go to the field assigned, and the Church may not de- 
sire to have the preacher who is sent to them ; but there is 
no appeal. Go he must, and have him the people must, or 
they are both liable to excommunication from the Methodist 
Episcopal Church. An instance or two will illustrate this 
point : — 

"At the session of the New York Conference, in 1839, it 
was in some way intimated to the Washington street Church, 
in Brooklyn, Long Island, that the Rev. B. Griffin was to be 
appointed to that charge. The Church accordingly, through 
a committee appointed for the purpose, presented itself before 
the bishop and remonstrated against Mr. Griffin's being sent 
to them as their pastor. But the remonstrance was disre- 
garded, and Mr. Griffin was stationed at Washington street." 

"At the session of the New England Conference, in 1841, 
both of the large societies in Lowell, Mass., petitioned for 
particular preachers ; but they were told that they should 
not have the men they asked for. One of the churches (St. 
Paul's) then requested to be left without a supply by the 



300 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

bishop — having made arrangements to employ a local preach- 
er. But the bishop regarded not the request, but forced a 
preacher upon them. In both these cases, the preachers pe- 
titioned for also added their request to the voice of the 
churches, so that the wishes of both preachers and people 
were disregarded. 

" The other church, after being denied the preacher they 
wanted, selected some four or five others, and stated to the 
bishop that they would be satisfied with either of them. But 
no ; they must not have either ; and to cap the climax of in- 
sult, the very man was sent them to whom they had objected. 
In consequence of rejecting their preachers and electing others, 
they were publicly declared to be without the pale of the 
Church. This alarming step of excommunicating whole 
churches without the form of a trial, developes another of the 
anti- American features of Episcopal Methodism — especially 
when it is considered that the subject was carried up to the 
bishop, and he approved of it, and pronounced it Method- 
ism."* 

I might multiply instances of this kind, but the limits of 
this tract will not permit. The simple fact that the power 
thus assumed by Methodist bishops, and countenanced and 
supported by the Methodist Episcopal Church may, at any 
time, be exercised oppressively, is sufficient to prove that 
this system is anti- American ; for Americanism makes no 
provision for the exercise of oppression, but constantly 
guards against the abuse even of delegated power. Episcopal 
Methodism, on the contrary, countenances and supports the 
oppressive exercise of assumed power. It is therefore Re- 
publicanism backwards. 

You deny to the members of the society the right to have any 



* Book for the times, pages 114-116. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 301 

voice in deciding who is a proper member to be received into 
their fellowship. You give to the preacher in charge the 
authority to say who shall, and who shall not be admitted 
into a Methodist society, and it is for him to say with whom 
the dear people must fellowship and commune as a mem- 
ber. 

You deny to the 'private member the exercise of his inalien- 
able right as an American citizen and Christian, to be tried, 
when arraigned, by a jury of his peers, and the right to chal- 
lenge the jury. 

The private member is wholly at the mercy of the preach- 
er in charge. It is in the power of the preacher to have 
any private member acquitted though guilty, or condemned 
though innocent. I say the Discipline undoubtedly gives 
him the power. This feature was ably reviewed in 1848 by 
the editor of the Calvinislic Magazine, and he being an 
eminent Presbyterian Doctor of Divinity, I will allow him 
to speak. 

" The Discipline is a rod of iron in its regulations as to 
the trial of ils private members. The book says : — ' How- 
shall an accused member be brought to trial ? Ans. Before 
the society of which he is a member, or a select number of 
them, in the presence of a bishop, elder, deacon, or preacher, 
in the following manner : Let ihe accused and accuser be 
brought face to face ; but if this cannot be done, let the next 
best evidence be procured. If the accused person be found 
guilty by the decision of a majority of the members before 
whom he is brought to trial, and the crime be such as is ex- 
pressly forbidden by the Word of God, sufficient to exclude 
a person from the kingdom of grace and glory, let the min- 
ister or preacher who has charge of the circuit expel him.' 
; Nevertheless, if (in any of several cases mentioned) the 
minister or preacher differ in judgment from a majority of 



302 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

the society, or select number, concerning the innocence or 
guilt of the accused person, the trial in such case may be 
referred by the minister or preacher to the ensuing quarterly 
meeting Conference.' (Page 96.) The same right of ap- 
peal to the next quarterly Conference is allowed to the ex- 
cluded person, with the exception of such as absent them- 
selves from trial, &c. 'And the majority of the travelling 
and local preachers, exhorters, stewards, and leaders present, 
shall finally determine the case.' (Page 98.) 

" Here we have the rod of iron. Such a process of trial 
— such a provision, or rather such a no-provision to secure 
justice, in the trial of a Church member, cannot be equalled 
in any Protestant denomination. It has no parallel out of 
the Papacy. Let us briefly examine it. ' The member 
shall be brought to trial before the society of which he is a 
member, or a select number of them, in the presence of the 
bishop, elder, deacon, or preacher.' Now, we ask, does the 
book tell us how the member is to be brought before the 
society, or select number ?. No ; the book is silent. To 
whom must the accuser go with his accusation ? The book 
is silent. How much notice as to time is given to the ac- 
cused 1 The book is silent. Is the accused told by formal 
citation the charge against him, and the names of the witnesses 
to support it ? The book is silent. May he be turned into 
trial at a moment's warning, without any preparation? The 
book is silent. And that silence is ominous and terrible. 
That silence leads us to believe that the bishop, elder, dea- 
con, or preacher, has the whole arrangement of this beginning 
of actual process. He may or may not receive the accusation 
at his pleasure. He may or he may not give citation to the 
accused, with due notice, other than his pleasure. Here, then, 
riagrant wrong may be done at the threshold of the court 
of justice. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 303 

"Once more. Suppose the accused is before the judica- 
tory. Who compose that judicatory ? The book says, the 
society of which the accused is a member, or a select number 
of them. Very well. But here we ask again, who decides 
whether the accused shall be tried before the society, or a 
select number ? The book is silent. Again. Who chooses 
that select number? The book is silent. What does this 
silence mean ? Does it teach us that this part of the process 
of trial is, also, under the control of the preacher 1 May he 
decide that the accused shall be tried by a select number ; 
and may he choose, or manage the summoning of that select 
number % Then he may directly or indirectly pack that jury. 
Look farther. ' Let the accused and accuser be brought 
face to face ; but if this cannot be done, let the next best evi- 
dence be procured. 5 Again we ask, how is this next best 
evidence to be procured ? The book is silent. Is there any 
thing about the citation of witnesses % No. Any thing as 
to a commission to take the testimony of absent witnesses, 
and the right of the accused to attend and cross-examine ? 
No ; the book is silent. Are we to infer that the bishop, 
elder, deacon or preacher is left by the book to procure this 
next best evidence in any way he may think proper ? And 
might they procure this next best evidence after this fashion : 
— Might they send a committee to take the testimony of a lady, 
who was asked to tell what a second lady had told her, a third 
lady had said ? and might this third lady be tried on such tes- 
timony and expelled the Methodist Church ? 

Verily, the accused member in the Methodist Church has 
no safeguard around him. For, our readers will see, First, 
that the original trial before the society, or select number, may 
be a farce, from the prodigious control of the preacher over 
the society, or in the appointment of the select number. Sec- 
ondly, that the preacher has the right to refer the trial, if 



304 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

he differ in judgment from the society, or the select number, to 
the ensuing quarterly meeting Conference. Will it be said 
that the member, if condemned, is allowed to appeal 1 Yes, 
he may appeal. But where must he carry his appeal? 
Why, ' He shall be allowed an appeal to that same next 
quarterly meeting Conference.' And there, truly, he has 
less chance against the preacher than he had before the so- 
ciety, or the select number. For who compose the Quar- 
terly Conference ? Ans. The travelling and local preachers, 
exhorters, stewards, and leaders. Now, from the book, the 
exhorters, stewards and leaders, whatever may be true of 
the local preachers, are mere puppets in the hands of the 
itinerant ministers. And yet that court of appeals ''finally 
determines the case? 

" This is the rod of iron with a vengeance. A lawyer of 
highest standing in our country told us, that this whole 
thing called a trial in the Methodist Church, was the veriest 
burlesque upon justice. And we, here, do now challenge 
any laivyer to come out and say that there is security against 
wrong to the accused, afforded by the Methodist Discipline. 
We defy him to do it. We do not challenge a Methodist 
editor to gabble silly sentences. We invite a lawyer — a 
judge of the rights of man in courts of justice, to meet this 
challenge, and to meet it over his own proper name. We 
defy him to do it. 

" N. B. — It is welJ to caution our readers who have not the 
Discipline. Methodists may tell them, as they told us, when 
Ave had not examined the book, ' Oh ! our trial is the fairest 
in the world— it is by arbitration ! The accuser chooses one ; 
the accused another ; these two a third. The preacher has 
little to do with it.' But on consulting the book, we found 
that this arbitration trial had reference only to cases of ' any 
dispute between two or more members concerning the pay- 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 305 

ment of debts.' It has nothing to do with the regular trial 
for Church offences. Mark that. 

"Again. Methodists may say, f Our trial is, in fact, con- 
ducted so, and so, and so.' But let it be fully borne in mind, 
that any mode of trial, which actually takes place, not in 
the Discipline, is nothing else than the permission of the 
preacher — his mere pleasure to let it be so. And such mode of 
trial, not in the Discipline, may be as various as the whims 
or consistency, the tyranny or kindness, the arrogance or 
humility, the regard for or disregard of popularity, which 
will be found in the minds of the many thousand itinerant 
preachers. Trial, thus controlled, is a rod of iron." 

I cannot allow this subject to pass without calling more 
especial attention to one feature not anti-American only, but 
anti-civilized. The member when arraigned is not allowed to 
challenge the jury which the preacher may select. The jury 
may consist of his most inveterate enemies, and still he has 
no more right to object than the poor victim in the hands of 
the inquisitorial fathers ! 

The right to challenge jurors (when trial by jury exists) 
is acknowledged in all civilized and Christian countries, even 
in monarchical countries. The right is considered a natural 
right — inalienable and indefeasible, and to violate it is con- 
sidered a barbarous outrage upon humanity, and a libel upon 
civilization. And yet the clergy — the fathers of the Method- 
ist hierarchy — deny it to their subjects, and that in repub- 
lican America; and the boasting democrats of America sub- 
mit to it — ay, endorse and support the barbarity ! We do 
not misrepresent Methodism in this ; Dr. Bond in his " Econ- 
omy of Methodism," p. 87, thus admits and lamely apolo- 
gizes for it : " The right to challenge jurors, it is alleged, is 
acknowledged in all civilized and Christian countries. * * * 
We admit, however, that all civilized and Christian countries 



306 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

ought to adopt it as a civil institution [and yet Methodism 
ought not to adopt it as a religious one !] of inestimable 
value ; but it does not follow that precisely the same regu- 
lation ought to be, or even can be, adopted in Church govern- 
ment, accompanied with the right to challenge jurors. The 
society that forbids a fair trial is an inquisition, not a Church." 

Then it follows that a Methodist society is an inquisition, 
and not a Church. But Methodists resign the right of 
suffrage not only in the election of their legislators and 
representatives, and their preachers, but in receiving and 
excluding members from their societies. The travel- 
ling preachers are omnipotent every where, ruling and 
controlling all. However unjust and iniquitous their 
administration, the people must suffer in silence. They are 
forbidden to express their dissent. The threat is, " Com- 
plain, if you dare. You will be guilty of speaking un- 
charitably or unprofitably and evil of your ministers, 
which is expressly forbidden on pain of exclusion. The 
Discipline forbids uncharitable or unprofitable conversa- 
tion ; particularly speaking evil of magistrates and ministers" 
— Dis. p. I, Chap, xi., sec. 11. Exclusion here stares in the 
face the one disposed to condemn clerical iniquity and in- 
trigue. Here is one of the first principles of Protestantism 
renounced, one of the crowning glories of Christianity dis- 
honored and rejected. 

"Art. 14th. Whenever the members of a church resign 
the right of suffrage, and of discussing freely and fearlessly 
the conduct of their rulers, whether it be done by direct 
concession, or indirectly by attaching themselves to, and 
continuing within the pale of a Church where such a system 
of polity obtains, they renounce, to a fearful extent, one of 
the first principles of the Protestant religion, and bring dis- 
honor upon its name. Whenever spiritual rulers attempt 




Methodism lias been defined, Religion on horseback. This would be a. belter d»tini 
The Preachers o>Ttiik People's Back.— Page COT. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS, 307 

to check a perfectly free communication of thoughts and 
feelings among the people — when the lips and the pens of 
the laity are interdicted, without their oversight and license 
— when they attempt to repress honest convictions and free 
inquiry — when their disapprobation is shown to all who do 
not support them, and their displeasure incurred by the dif- 
fusion of intelligence among the people not calculated to 
increase their power and reputation ; then it becomes the 
duty of the people to decline their oversight, as men un- 
worthy to rule the Church of God. The rock on which the 
Church has split for ages is, that the sovereign power to reg- 
ulate all ecclesiastical matters (not decided by the Scrip- 
tures, and which of right belongs to a Christian community, 
as such) has, by a most mischievous and unnatural policy, 
misnamed expediency, been transferred to the hands of a few 
ministers, who have been, in part, the patricians of the min- 
istry, and the aristocracy of the Church." — Bascom. 

Upon one of the court journals of the South this motto 
can be seen : " Methodism is religion on horseback." Now, 
in view of the facts and features presented — in view of the 
principles laid down by Bishop Bascom — the usurpation of 
the rights and the systematized oppression of the people, I 
am compelled to amend it thus : . 

" Methodism is the preachers on the people's back." 



LETTER IXV 



IS METHODISM REPUBLICAN? 

It may be regarded a work of supererogation to discuss 
this question separately, after all the preceding discussions, 
directly or indirectly, involving it. But I know whom I 
oppose. I know that your preachers all over the land boast 
that Methodism is Republican — that it was modelled after 
the government of this nation, or our national government 
after it, and doubtless they succeed in making many of their 
followers believe it, and reecho the sentiment. But is it re- 
publican'? What is the signification of the term? Let Web- 
ster be the standard : — 

" Republic, a commonwealth ; a state in which the exercise 
of the sovereign power is lodged in representatives elected by 
the people. In modern usage it differs from a democracy 
or democratic state, in which the people exercise the powers 
of sovereignty in person." 

" Republican, pertaining to a republic ; consisting of a com- 
monwealth." 

"A Hierarchy, the persons who have the exclusive direc- 
tion of things sacred; used especially of a body of clergy of 
different ranks or orders." 

In all republican governments, then, the sovereign, all- 
directing and controlling power must be vested in the people. 
An organization in which the people have no voice, is desti- 
tute of the first feature of a republican government. Not 
the faintest claim to republicanism can be set up for it. How 
is it in the polity of Methodism'? Dr. Hodgson declares 
that the supreme power is in the hands of the travelling 

(SOS) 



republicanism: backwards. 309 

preachers. Is it not then a hierarchy 1 If this is not enough 
to settle the question, I might refer you to the operation of 
Cookman's Great Iron Wheel illustration,* but I am dis- 
posed to treat this candidly, investigate principles, and insti- 
tute comparisons and contrasts for the sake of the reader 
and inquirer ; for the age is upon us when this question of 
Church government will be intensely agitated. 

To decide upon the character of a government, we must 
first ascertain where or in whom the sovereignty resides, and 
what is meant by sovereignty. Writers on the law of nature 
and of nations, when they speak with exactness, use the word 
sovereignty to denote, not the supreme power employed 
in administering the government, but that on which the ex- 
istence of the government depends — the source of all power. 

In an absolute monarchy the sovereignty resides in the 
king ; in an aristocracy it resides in the nobles ; in a democ- 
racy or republic it resides in the people. In a mixed govern- 
ment it resides partly in the one and partly in the other. 

In the British government, the sovereignty resides in the 
Parliament, that is, in the king, lords, and commons. There, 
these combined have power to do whatever of a political 
nature they choose. They have power not only to alter the 
laws,but to change at pleasure the constitution of the kindgom. 

Very different is it in these United States. Here the 
sovereignty resides not in the government, either State or 
Federal, but in the people. They delegate to their rulers, 
not the sovereignty, but simply the exercise of certain func- 
tions of the sovereignty, reserving the rest to themselves. 
So careful are the people, that they make a distinct delegation 
of legislative, judicial and executive powers to different men, 
and then make a further division of them among the Federal 

* The reader is iavited to examine the engraving of the Iron Wheel, 



310 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. 

and State authorities. All our constitutions, State and Fed- 
eral, abound in restrictions on the powers of our rulers. 

The President is the supreme executive authority of the 
Union, having under him various subordinate executive offi- 
cers, as the members of his cabinet, the marshals, the collect- 
ors of customs, and all others whose business is to execute 
the civil laws of the Union. But these, take them either 
individually or collectively, are not sovereign. 

The Governor is the supreme executive authority in each 
State. The mayors of cities, the sheriffs of counties, and the 
constables of wards and of townships, are so many subord- 
inate executive officers. But neither are these sovereign. 

In each State, there is a supreme court, having under it 
various inferior or subordinate courts. 

In the United States, there is a supreme court, to which 
the district and circuit courts are subordinate. But we can- 
not, if we speak with technical propriety, say that the United 
States Supreme Court is sovereign, for that is a body of 
limited powers bound by the constitution and all the laws 
of the Union, and the very nature of political sovereignty is 
such that it knows of no limit on itself imposed by human 
authority. Thus the British Parliament acknowledges no 
power above itself. And thus the people of the United States 
admit of no power above them to prevent their altering the 
constitution at pleasure. Each individual is, indeed, bound 
to obey the laws : but the people, in their collective capacity, 
are sovereign, and as such responsible to no human tribunal. 

Let us now apply these principles to Church government. 

In the Methodist Episcopal Church the sovereignty resides 
in the whole body of travelling preachers in full connexion. 
There is no limit on their powers in their government of the 
Church, except what their own sense of justice, or their own 
sense of expediency, under the laws of the land, may impose. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. oil 

In the Presbyterian society the sovereignty resides in the 
ministry and ruling elders, who govern the body exclusively, 
through the Session, the Presbytery, Synod, and General 
Assembly. The laity are eligible to none of these bodies, 
save that the elders are elected from the laity, thouh this is of 
seldom occurrence, since the eldership is an imperial body, 
ruling for life or good behavior. Neither the elders nor 
ministers are amenable to the people — the laity. 

Im the Methodist Protestant Church, the sovereignty re- 
sides in the whole body of male members, as well lay as 
clerical, who are twenty-one years of age. And they have 
no other limit on their powers, in relation to their own 
ecclesiastical organization, than have the travelling preachers 
in the Methodist Episcopal Church. 

In the Baptist and Congregational Churches, the sov- 
ereignty resides in the whole body of members, without 
distinction of sex or age. All are equal, and possessed of 
equal rights, equal authority and power. The Baptist 
Churches are pure democracies, and the only form of purely- 
democratic governments in the world. Each Church — the 
congregated membership — calls and dismisses its pastors, 
receives, dismisses, disciplines and excludes its members. 
Before the whole Church the accused person is tried. The 
Bible alone is the criterion, it being the only rule of faith or 
practice acknowledged. The decision of a majority is the 
ultimate verdict, and since the Church is independent, there is 
no power above it, and consequently there is no appeal from 
its decisions ; which agrees with Matt, xviii: — " If he will not 
hear the Church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and 
a publican." The Church can reconsider her act, whenever a 
majority can be found in favor of it. 

There is this difference, also, to be marked between the 
Baptist and Congregational Churches on the one side, and 



312 THE GKEAT IKON WHEEL. 

the Methodist Episcopal and Methodist Protestant Church on 
the other. Both the Methodist Episcopal Church and the 
Methodist Protestant Church are consolidated governments. 
The Methodist Episcopal Church is, throughout its bounds, 
one Church, divided into different societies according to local- 
ities. And the like remark applies to the Methodist Prot- 
estant Church. On the other hand, each Baptist and each 
Congregational Church, is in itself an independent sov- 
ereignty. Many of these form associations, but these are 
alliances, which may be dissolved at pleasure. According 
to their views, a Church does not forfeit or in the least degree 
impair its Church character by withdrawing from such asso- 
ciations. Now, in the Methodist Episcopal Church, the sov- 
ereignty, as already stated, resides in the whole body of the 
travelling ministers, and it has pleased them to retain in 
their own hands the supreme legislative and supreme judicial 
powers. They have delegated these to no one. It has, indeed, 
pleased them to divide these powers in a certain manner 
between the Annual and General Conferences, but when it 
pleases them they can make a new distribution of these 
powers among themselves. The power which imposes re- 
strictions can remove them. A kind of inferior power of 
legislating and judging they have delegated to the Quarterly 
Conferences, or to their members, and also a power of judging 
in certain cases to committees appointed by the ministers. 

The supreme executive power the travelling ministers 
have delegated to the bishops ; a subordinate power to the 
presiding elders ; a more subordinate power to the ministers 
in charge of circuits and stations ; and a still more subor- 
dinate power to the Quarterly Conferences. 

In the Methodist Protestant as in the Methodist Episco- 
pal Church, there are superior and subordinate authorities. 
But there is this marked difference between them. In the 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS, 313 

Methodist Episcopal Church, all power descends from the 
travelling preachers to the people. In the Methodist Prot- 
estant Church, all governing power ascends from the people 
to the minister. They have a constitution, which was form- 
ed by their delegates 111 convention assembled. 

Very, very different, is it in the Methodist Episcopal Church, 
as was eloquently said by a Methodist w T riter, more than 
twenty years ago : — 

" The Bishop appoints the minister ; the minister appoints 
the class-leader and stewards ; these appoint the sexton, w r ho, 
in his turn, appoints the grave-digger. So that, from him 
who soars aloft and overlooks God's heritage, down to him 
who delves in the earth and buries the bodies of the saints, 
all derive their power from the ministry, and all are respon- 
sible to them and to them only, for their proceedings." 

A great deal of pains has been taken by some waiters 
to show that the laity have some power in the Methodist 
Episcopal Church. It was quite unnecessary for them to 
take this pains. The laity have some power in the govern- 
ment of the Methodist Episcopal Church; but it is precisely 
such power as the subjects of the Sultan of Turkey, the Shah 
of Persia, and the Autocrat of Russia have in the govern- 
ment of their respective countries — that is, a power derived 
from their superior rulers. 

I will allow the pen of a distinguished Methodist writer to 
draw the contrast between our republican government and 
the polity of Methodism,* at length : — 

" It is a principle of politics, and a principle verified by 
all human experience, that unchecked power, in the hands of 
any set of men, no matter whether lay or ecclesiastic, will 

* This article appeared in the Philadelphia Church Advocate, an 
ftble Methodist paper— not a court journal, of course. 
14 



314 THE GEE AT IKON WHEEL. 

degenerate into tyranny, and be exercised, not for the wel- 
fare of the governed, but for the gratification of the passions 
and the promotion of the interests of the governors. 

" To guard against this, the American people have made a 
most careful division of power among the township, county. 
State and Federal authorities, taking care that no one officer 
shall have more power than is necessary for the proper dis- 
charge of his functions, and that they shall be so arranged 
as to act as checks and guards on one another. With how 
much jealousy this principle is watched, is evident from the 
frequent discussion we have of the subject of 'State Rights.' 
Not content, however, with this division of power, the Amer- 
ican people make another into legislative, judicial, and 
executive, and are very careful that one department shall 
not encroach on another. 

" But how is it in the Church — in our Methodist Episcopal 
Church'? Here all power is in the hands of a, compara- 
tively speaking, small body of men, the travelling preachers, 
and there is no division of it, except such as they make for 
their own convenience. If they divide this poM T er among 
the General and Annual Conferences, it is for their own con- 
venience. If they delegate a part of it to the Quarterly 
Conferences, it is only that they may thereby the more 
easily carry out their scheme of ecclesiastical policy. The 
Quarterly Conferences have no powers except those which 
the travelling preachers have generously been pleased to 
grant them, and this power, which the travelling preachers 
have granted, they can, if they should deem it politic, take 
away. Even the power the private members have of recom- 
mending candidates for the offices of local preachers and 
exhorters, is not held by them as a right. It is, like the 
power of the Quarterly Conferences, a gracious concession 
by the travelling preachers, 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWAKDS. 315 

" In the Methodist Episcopal Church, no one, except the 
travelling preachers, has any rights. All that the local 
preachers, exhorters, class-leaders, and private members 
possess, are mere privileges, for which they are indebted to 
the sovereign will and pleasure of their ' Divine Eight 
rulers. 

" Perhaps it may be said that the Methodist Episcopal sys- 
tem has its own checks and guards — that the bishops are 
checks on the presiding elders, the presiding elders on the 
ministers in charge of circuits and stations, and the minis- 
ters in charge on their assistants. But such checks are to 
be found in every despotism. They are the mere relations 
of superiors and subordinates, without which no government, 
either free or despotic, can exist. There is nothing in them 
which insures effective responsibility to the people : conse- 
quently nothing in them to prevent the government from 
degenerating into an instrument for gratifying the passions 
and promoting the interests of the governors, instead of 
being what it ought to be — an instrument for promoting the 
welfare of the governed. 

" Under the Methodist Episcopal system, one and the same 
man may, as a member of the General Conference, make 
laws and regulations, and afterwards, as minister in charge 
of circuit or station, give a judicial interpretation of them, 
and then carry them into execution. The law-giving, the 
judicial, and the executive functions, are all united in his 
person. He can act as presiding judge, and the same time 
as prosecuting attorney ; select his associate judges, direct 
all the proceedings, pronounce sentence, and finally carry it 
into execution. If he does not do all this, it is an act of 
gracious forbearance on his part, or else a prudent deference 
to public opinion. 'The Discipline' gives him power to 
do it. 



316 THE GftEAT IKON WHEEL. 

" Whatever his decision may be, there is no appeal from it, 
except to the Quarterly Conference, and that very Quarterly 
Conference consists, for the most part, of members who can 
be appointed and removed at his pleasure. 

" It may be that the court created by the ministers in 
charge, may give a decision not exactly according to his 
wishes. Then it is duly provided that, in cases of ' inveigh- 
ing against the Discipline,' and other cases which are duly 
enumerated, ' if the minister or preacher differ in judgment 
from the majority of the society or the select number, con- 
cerning the innocence or guilt of the accused person, the 
trial in such case may be referred by the minister or 
preacher, to the ensuing Quarterly Conference.' 

" Did ever any thing equal this 1 According to the princi- 
ples of common law, no man can be tried twice for the same 
offence. But this is not the principle of Methodist Episco- 
pal canon law. It is not enough, if a travelling preacher has 
an antipathy to a private member, that he can determine, in 
the first instance, whether he shall be tried by the whole 
society, or by a select number. It is not enough that he 
has power to determine how many this ' select number* 
shall be, and of what persons it shall consist. It is not 
enough that he has power to direct the whole proceedings. 
If they do not terminate exactly as he desires, he has power 
to remove the case to the Quarterly Conference, and then, 
if the class-leaders do not decide as he wishes, he has power 
to remove them and appoint others in their stead. 

" Can the travelling preachers read this, their own law, 
and not blush that they have suffered it to disfigure their 
statute-book ?" 

You must remember, and I hope the reader will remem- 
ber, that it is a Methodist, and a member of the Methodist 
E. Church in full connection and fellowship, who writes this. 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 817 

He knows whereof he affirms — he has watched the workings 
of the wheel-within-a-wheel power for years, and now, for 
the honor and glory of Methodism, which he loves, he would 
have the despotic and tyrannical features wiped out, and the 
system christianized and scripturalized, and consequently re- 
publicanized. But I allow him to proceed : 

" Perhaps it may be alleged that though all this is strictly 
true according to the letter, yet, in its practical application 
it -is much less oppressive than might be supposed, owing to 
the good temper and good disposition of those who are in- 
trusted with its administration ; and that prudential motives 
restrain in the exercise of their power, many travelling 
preachers who have neither good temper nor good disposi- 
tion. To a certain extent this is true. If it were not, the 
system could not be endured for a single year. But every 
correct system of government contains within itself checks 
on the power of the rulers. Knowing that the best of men 
are fallible, it trusts as little as possible to the goodness of 
men. Against abuses of power it does not depend on 
checks from without, but on checks from within. 

" These evils do not, however, exist [only] in theory. The 
venerable John Hood, who was one of the original members 
of the society in this city, and who was for more than fifty 
years a class-leader at St. George's and at the Union, used 
to say that the conduct of the travelling preachers had been 
arbitrary from the beginning. How could it be otherwise 1 
Arbitrary power must produce arbitrary action. The sou- 
briquet by which Richard Rankin, Mr. Wesley's first super- 
intendent on this continent, was known, was that of ' The 
Proud Scot.' These three little words speak volumes, for 
they show the judgment the first race of American Method- 
ists had of one of their earliest rulers. Arbitrary proceed- 
ings, among which were the violent placing and displacing 



318 THE ORE AT IRON WHEEL. 

of class-leaders, led to the secession of a number of the most 
respectable members from St. George's, and to the founda- 
tion of the Union Church in this city.* That Church re- 
mained independent of the Conference for one whole year. 
It is not correct to speak of these evils as existing in theory 
only. The arbitrary proceedings of the travelling preachers 
drive thousands every year from the Methodist Episcopal 
Church. 

"But we have not yet given all the checks which the 
American people have instituted to prevent abuses of power. 
Not content with the division of functions already mentioned, 
they will not suffer any of their rulers, the judiciary excepted, 
to hold power for more than a certain period. The mem- 
bers of the State Legislatures are elected for but one or 
two years, the Governors of States are elected for but two 
or three years, or perhaps for but one, and then not always 
reeligible. The members of the larger house of Congress 
are elected for but two years ; the members of the Senate 
for but six years. The President himself for but four. But 
our travelling preachers, like the kings and nobility of Eu- 
rope, hold their power for life. At least no one of them 
can be displaced, but by the action of his brother itinerants. 
No matter how bad his conduct may be, no action of the 
laity can divest him of his ' Divine Right' to govern the 
Methodist people. 

" In the State, by the frequent recurrence of elections, the 
strict responsibility of the rulers to their constituents is pre- 
served. But the travelling preachers are under no such re- 
sponsibility. In point of fact they have no constituents. They 
represent no body but themselves and their own order. 

" There is, indeed, one branch of their government, in which 

* Philadelphia. 






REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 319 

the American people have given some degree of permanency 
to their officials, and that is the judiciary .* But they have 
not left this branch of the government without suitable 
checks. The presiding judge does not, as in the Methodist 
Episcopal Church, select his associates. But they all derive 
their authority from one appointing power, and thus each is 
made a check on the others. They are further checked by 
juries fresh from the people ; and still further by the bar, 
men learned in the law, who, if they find a judge acting im- 
properly, may have him removed by impeachment or ad- 
dress. In this manner is secured an effective responsibility 
of the judiciary to the people, though in a less direct way 
than in the case of the legislative and executive depart- 
ments of the government. 

" Having imposed all these checks, the American people 
have given some degree of permanency to the tenure of 
office by the judges. And in so doing they have acted 
wisely, as, without it, there would be no uniformity in ju- 
dicial proceedings. 

" But in our Church, as if it was intended that the Method- 
ist Episcopal system should be in all things the antipode 
of the American political system, we have directly the re- 
verse. Our primary courts are mere committees, appointed 
as occasion may arise, or pro re nata, as a physician or 
lawyer would say, and appointed, except in arbitration of 
debts, by the travelling preacher or through his sufferance. 
It is true, indeed, that the travelling preacher may, instead 
of referring the case to ' a select number,' refer it to the 
whole society; but that, too, is a fluctuating body, and 
utterly unqualified to act in a judicial capacity. The court 



* The inferior judges are now chosen by the people in many of the 
States. 



820 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

of appeals, the Quarterly Conference, is no better. That is 
composed of men selected, not for their ability to judge, 
but on account of their ' gifts' for preaching, praying, ex- 
horting, and class-leading, with a few added to attend to 
pecuniary matters. 

" A body so constituted ought to be a mere council, and 
never attempt to exercise judicial functions. The American 
people never refer judiciary cases to town meetings or mixed 
assemblies. They refer them to bodies composed of a few 
men, carefully selected on account of their ability to dis- 
charge the duties of judges. 

" The Methodist Episcopal system of government is bad 
from beginning to end. But the judiciary part of it is the 
worst of all. 

" We have not yet finished the contrast. In affairs of State, 
.the utmost latitude of discussion is allowed. From the 
press and from the stump, our highest rulers are assailed, 
not only vigorously, but virulently, and quite as often un- 
justly as justly. This is not without its evils, but the evils 
are not to be compared with the benefits that arise from 
this liberty. 

" Without freedom of speech and of the press, there can be 
no free government. But in the Methodist Episcopal 
Church, we have neither. There is a law forbidding the 
members 'to speak evil of magistrates and ministers.' It 
it true that there is reason to suspect that by ministers Mr. 
Wesley meant not ministers of religion, but ministers of 
State, or that if he meant ministers of religion, he had spe- 
cial reference to the clergy of the Church of England. It is 
certain that he did not mean travelling preachers, for this 
law was adopted before the first Conference was held, and 
he never was in the habit of calling the travelling preachers 
'ministers,' or addressing them as * reverends.' Our itine- 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 321 

rant preachers, however, who are the supreme judges, so 
construe the law as to make it mean their precious selves, 
and they are also the judges as to what constitutes ' evil 
speaking' in the sense of the statute, and what punishment 
shall be inflicted on him who dares thus to touch ' the Lord's 
anointed.' 

" it might, however, be supposed that the discussion of ab- 
stract principles would be allowed. Not so. Whoever 
ventures to assail any point or principle of Methodist polity, 
does it at his peril. There is another law about ' inveighing 
against the Discipline.' In what this ' inveighing' consists, 
the travelling preacher is the judge ; and how he can arrange 
the ' select number,' or the Quarterly Conference, so as to 
yield him due support in his judgment, must be evident from 
what we have already said of the structure of our courts 
ecclesiastical. 

" We have thus far confined our contrast of Methodist Epis- 
copal and American political government, to practical ad- 
ministration. If we consider the foundation of the two 
governments, the contrast is not the less striking. Our poli- 
tical governments did not form themselves, but were formed 
by delegates chosen by the people for that express purpose. 
And our governments, as well State as Federal, can exercise 
no powers except those which have thus been expresssly 
delegated to them. Our ' constitutions,' as well the State 
as the Federal, are little more than restrictions on the 
powers of our rulers. 

" But no convention of the Methodist people has ever-been 
held to devise a plan of government for the Methodist Epis- 
copal Church. Our travelling preachers assumed this power 
to themselves, without so much as asking the consent of the 
laity, and, of course, adapted every thing to the promotion 
of the interests and the gratifications of the passions of their 
14* 



322 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL, 

own order. In the American sense of the term, the Meth- 
odist Episcopal Church has no constitution. There are no re- 
strictions on the power of the rulers, except those which 
they themselves have seen fit to impose. 

" In the Asiatic sense of the term, the Methodist Episcopal 
Church has, indeed, a constitution, inasmuch as its govern- 
ment is made up of constituent parts. But, in this sense, 
Persia, Turkey, and Russia, have constitutions as well as 
Episcopal Methodism. If the Methodist people submit to 
the government that has been formed for them by others, it 
is from much the same principle that the subjects of Asiatic 
despotisms submit to the tyrannies that rule over them. 

" In the State, all power ascends from the people to their 
rulers. In the Church, all power descends from the travel- 
ling preachers to the people. 

" In the State all the citizens, stand on one level, and each is 
eligible to the highest offices in the government. In the 
Church, we have a noble order of men, the travelling preach- 
ers, who alone are considered competent to govern. 

" In the State, the Methodist stands erect, with all the 
rights of a man and a freeman. In the Church, he is de- 
graded, if not in his own eyes, in the eyes of others. ' I 
know not,' said a gentleman, ' on whom the Methodist 
Episcopal government reflects the most discredit — on the 
travelling preachers who have been guilty of these unwar- 
rantable assumptions of power, or on the people who tamely 
submit to them.' 

" Let a Methodist venture to complain of this state of 
things, and he is insultingly told, ' If you do not like the 
Church you can leave it.' It may be that it is endeared to 
him by the recollection of his father and mother, and by the 
memory of all whom he has loved best and respected most. 
It may be that all his social relations are in the Church. Ifc 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 323 

may be that himself and family have contributed liberally 
to its support for more than half a century. It may be that 
his talents are considerable, and his piety unquestionable. 
It may be that it is the only Church whose doctrines and 
forms of worship he can cordially approve. He has no 
objection, except to its government. This is enough. His 
' Divine Right' rulers want none but patient and submissive 
subjects. — ' If you do not like the Church you can leave it.' 

" It is unnecessary, at least for the present, for us to give 
airy other points of contrast of Methodist Episcopal and 
American political government. If the one is right, the 
other is wrong, and the reader must choose between them. 
The principles of right government are, we repeat it, the 
same in both Church and State, though they may differ to 
some extent in their application. They must necessarily be 
the same, for both Church and State have the same object in 
view, namely, the well-being of man ; both prohibit the like 
evils ; and the government of both is of necessity intrusted to 
fallible men. 

" The ' Divine Rights' of kings, and the ' Divine Rights' 
of priests, are too closely connected to be separated. If one 
class of these rights is well founded, so is the other. 

11 If the minister of religion is a minister of God, so also is 
the minister of State, and he is so declared to be by the 
apostle. 

" If it is right, then, that fallible men should be left without 
suitable checks in the government of the Church, it is also 
right that fallible men should be left without such checks in 
the government of the State. But it is not right that either 
statesmen or ecclesiastics should be intrusted with arbitrary 
power. 

" The principles we contend for are the principles of liberty, 
which are deeply rooted in the hearts of the American peo- 



$24 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL, 

pie, and it must be expected that, sooner or later, the Meth- 
odist portion of the American people will apply them to 
affairs of Church as well as affairs of State. 

* : There are some far-seeing men among the travelling 
preachers. To them we appeal. Do you think that princi- 
ples so antagonistic as those of Methodist Episcopal and 
American political government, can exist together, and not 
at some time produce a collision'? "Do you wish such a 
convulsion as they have had in England 1 ? Whether you 
wish it or not, be assured that it will come, sooner or later. 
The secular press will then, as in England, take part in the 
controversy, and it will then be seen that the ' great body of 
intelligent men in America' sanction the views we advocate. 

" Point out this danger to the more ignorant, the more big- 
oted, and the more prejudiced, of your brother itinerants. 
They may yield from a sense of policy, what they would 
never yield from a sense of justice. Persuade them to make 
a merit of necessity, and to give at once to the people a due 
share in the government. It is the only way in which the 
peace and prosperity of the Church can be placed on a per- 
manent basis." 

Prof. Deems, editor of the Southern Methodist Pulpit, 
urges that Methodism is too evidently behind the times, un- 
suited to the present age, and to the spirit of Americanism ; 
that it did very well for the sooty colliers of England — 
mere servants, too ignorant for self-government — but that 
it is out of all question to call upon American citizens, presi- 
dents and professors of colleges, judges, and senators, to 
submit to a Church government constructed by one of the 
most violent of English Tories. So do I think it out of all 
question. I quote a paragraph from the pen of Prof. Deems, 
as it is copied from his periodical into the Nashville Method- 
ist Advocate : — 



REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 325 

4i If. we may apply the figure to Methodism, we can very 
readily see that a government suited to the sooty colliers of 
England, servants, and the uncultivated, who had grown up 
amid all the peculiarities of an aristocratic country, might 
hardly be fit for a Church among whose laymen are presi- 
dents and professors in colleges, judges of supreme courts, 
senators, and men liberalized by professional learning and 
polite associations. The fact is, John Wesley formed socie- 
ties ; ours is a Church. John Wesley did not make govern- 
ment a special study ; but being a strong man and a violent 
Tory, and finding a sect gathering around him to be govern- 
ed, he seized the reins — he became autocrat ; and through his 
helpers, he governed most ably. It was very natural that 
when our Church was formed, it should be built somewhat 
after the model of the ' societies' of Wesley. Is it not too 
exact a copy, and may it not need mending ? Even if 
Wesley had made government a study, and was by nature 
superior to the mass he controlled, there are laymen in our 
Church in this day, as great natively as Wesley, who have 
paid much more attention to the science of government. 
This is said with great deference and much veneration for 
many things in the character of John Wesley. He was 
before his times ; ours before him." 

Joseph Walker, of Dallas Co., Ala, wrote this in 1826 : — 
" I w r as personally acquainted with Bishop Asbury. I have 
heard him converse with the Rev. Hope Hull, who was a 
friend to reform, and I easily collected the information that 
our Church government was framed chiefly by subjects of 
Great Britain. Of course I never wondered much that such 
men should have shaped their code, and made their ecclesi- 
astical laws, according to their own model. But when I 
consider that nearly all our present preachers are Ameri- 
cans : when I consider how excellent and powerful is the 



826 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

republican spirit which prevails in these United States, and 
how equal the civil laws under which we live ; when I see 
how carefully our civil and religious liberties are secured to 
the people of every possible variety of denomination, I am 
compelled to ask the question, Is not the form of our 
Church government, and the manner in which it is adminis- 
tered, an open insult to the Constitution of the United 
States? It surely is; and were it fully investigated and 
exposed to public view, such a despotic institution would 
make a bad appearance before the observation of a religious 
republic." 

Dr. Stevens, editor of the Boston Herald, a court journal, 
and himself as humble a courtier as ever bowed or fawned 
at the foot of an Episcopal throne, under the excitement 
produced by the declarations of the lawyers and the decision 
of Judge Nelson, writes thus : — 

" We are not opposed to the division of the property ; 
we have shown this fully heretofore ; but we are opposed to 
the constructions which these lawyers put upon our ecclesi- 
astical system — constructions which must prove seriously 
detrimental to Methodism North and South, and which 
should call forth the remonstrances of both parties in this 
case. Methodism is essentially an hierarchical despotism, 
and needs immediate and thorough revision to adapt it to 
our times and our country. Its clergy have powers to direct 
or even divide the Church, which they have expressly denied 
(as in the Canada case), and which no body of free and intel- 
ligent laymen ought to tolerate one year.'" 

I hope this chapter, since it is chiefly from the pens of 
Methodist writers belonging to your own society, will be 
read seriously, and without prejudice, by the Methodist 
people and American citizens. 



P A E T II. 



LETTER XXVI. 



THE PECULIAR DOCTRINES AND USAGES OF 
METHODISM. 

"A Calvinistic Creed, a Popish Liturgy, and an Armenian 
Clergy:' 

Dear Sir : — A review of the claims of Methodism to be 
considered a Church of Christ, would not be complete with- 
out a notice of the peculiarities of its creed — its doctrines 
and usages — its rites and ceremonies. All these are con- 
tained and enjoined in your Book of Discipline, to which you 
require all who join your societies implicitly to subscribe, 
and by which they are to be tried ; and by its observance or 
violation they stand or fall — they are retained or excluded. 
It is preeminently prescribed as the sole rule of faith and 
practice to your members ; they must believe and teach no 
more and no less than what is therein contained. It is the 
Bible of Methodists. 

The Origin of the Methodist Discipline. 

With whom did it originate'? Mr. Wesley informs us 
that, with some modifications, he compiled it from the Prayer- 
Book of the Church of England. Dr. Bopd says, " Qur doc- 
trines are avowedly those of the Protestant Episcopal 
Church."* We are then in a fair way to find the answer to 
the question ; for it is an admitted fact, that the Episcopal 



* Economy of Methodism, p. 20. 
(32T) 



328 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

Prayer- Book is of Popish origin ; it has all the characteris- 
tics which distinguish the Papal system. Episcopalians 
boast that their creed is that of the Catholic Church in the 
seventh century.* 

" The Prayer-Book was compiled from the Romish mis- 
sals used in the various dioceses of that country. Indeed, 
almost the entire table of collects, epistles, and gospels, now 
contained in the Prayer-Book, is identical with that of the 
Roman Sacramentary ; and many of the other prayers and 
ordinals of the English and American service are still to be 
found in the modern missal. It will not suffice to answer, 
that the epistles, gospels, &c, may be found in the Bible. 
In the order in which they appear in the Prayer-Book they 
are not found in the Bible, but in the Roman Sacramentary. 
Nor will it suffice to say, that the last revision of the missal 
took place in 1570, while the Prayer-Book was established, 
in its present form, in 1569; so that the latter could not 
have come from the former. The services from which both 
drew were, by universal admission, extant long before either 
of those periods. And the English Prayer Book was not 
brought to the state in which it now stands until Friday, 
December 20, 1661, nearly one hundred years after the date 
assigned. The American Prayer-Book (to overlook the 
later addition of hymns) did not attain its present form 
prior to the year 1804. But, notwithstanding these revi- 
sions, the Prayer-Book used in your communion is substan- 
tially of Romish origin. Of all the ancient collects -it con- 
tains, there are but four which are not found in the Sacra- 
mentary. In your morning and evening service, litanies 
ordinal, and psalter, the points of resemblance incessantly, 
and, at least in one instance, ludicrously appear. In the 

* See Dr. Jams' Church History. Bishop Whittingham. 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 829 

Bible, the 14th Psalm has seven verses ; but your Prayer- 
Book, following the old Eoman service, gives it eleven ! 

" Your Prayer-Book, therefore, subjects those who use it 
to singular infelicities. It ignobly restrains their Christian 
liberty, by confining their services to phrases coined by 
Rome. Made, like your homilies, for an age of ignorance, 
when ministers could not write their names, it holds the 
devotional aspirations of your most eloquent preachers in 
leading-strings, as if they were all babes in Christ. It fixes 
upon them the battology of the litany and communion 
service ; the tables of ; Holy Scriptures/ with the Apocry- 
pha among them ; the calendar of saints, with corresponding 
festivals and fasts, some 125 in number; the doctrine of 
baptismal regeneration, the error of the sacraments, and the 
apostolic succession transmitted by the Holy Ghost. From 
the very fact of its origin, its language has ecclesiastical 
meanings, which subserve the doctrines of Rome, and which 
year by year are pouring converts into the bosom of the 
Papal communion."* 

The Liturgy, then, of the Book of Common Prayer is con- 
fessedly " popish." An English lord, speaking of the Church 
of England, declares it had '■ a Calvinistic creed, a popish 
liturgy, and an Armenian clergy ;" and I will show you 
that your society possesses these same features. 

Whence came your creed and Liturgy % Second-handed 
from the Romish apostacy, and is boldly marked with Pop- 
ish features. Your Liturgy is popish. The adoption of 
a Liturgy is a Popish feature — a mark of the beast. " But 
it is only a form of worship," you may say ; " and it is pro- 
per to have forms." Very well ; but yours, like those of 

* Letters on Episcopacy, addressed to the Episcopal clergy of South 
Carolina. By E. T. Winkler. Southern Baptist for Feb. 2, 1853. 



380 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

the Catholic Church, from which they were copied, are 
enjoined by an inviolable law. They constitute a part of the 
Book of Discipline, which you require both member and 
minister to observe and keep in " every point, great and 
small." To refuse to observe them is to refuse to keep and 
obey the Discipline. To speak against them is to " inveigh 
against the Discipline," and expulsion is the penalty. By 
what authority have you enacted or adopted forms of wor- 
ship, rites and services, feasts and fasts, which you claim the 
right to change at your pleasure, and enjoined them upon 
the Church of God, excommunicating those who will not 
keep your traditions'? It is the popish principle which I 
repudiate. Who gave you this authority — this prerogative, 
which belongs to Christ, the King of Zion, only ? 

You (the clergy in Conference assembled) claim the 
authority to ordain, change or abolish rites and ceremonies 
whenever you see fit. 

" Every particular Church [i. e., General Conference, for no 
other body in Methodism has the power, the Conference or 
clergy is then the Church ! !] may ordain, change or abolish 
rules and ceremonies so that all things may be done to edi- 
fication. — Articles of Religion^ xxii. 

The rites and ceremonies of the Methodist Church, then, 
are purely the traditions of the elders — "the commandments 
of men" Am I to worship Christ with these % Will he be 
pleased with such worship 1 "In vain do ye worship me, 
teaching for doctrines the commandments of men," is his 
own replv. We cannot serve two masters — Christ and men ; 
God and the General Conference. 

But to " break the rites and ceremonies" that the preachers 
ordain or amend quadrennially, subjects the member to re- 
buke and exclusion from Christ's Church, if Methodism be 
a Church of Christ. What savs the law 1 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 831 

"Whosoever, through his private judgment [here we see 
private judgment is not allowed even with respect to those 
things that the clergy may enjoin !], willingly and purposely 
doth openly break rites and ceremonies of the Church to 
which he belongs, which are not repugnant to the word of 
God [and who, pray, are to be the judges ? The very ministers 
who ordain the rites ! The people are not allowed to exer- 
cise any judgment whatever, but to take for granted that 
whatever the ministers command is not repugnant to God's 
word ! and is not this Popery full grown /], and are ordain- 
ed and approved by common authority, ought to be rebuked 
openly, that others may fear to do the like," &c. — Art. Rel. 
xxii. 

This is one of the doctrines of your society, for I find it 
in your "Articles of Religion." How blindly do you re- 
quire Methodists to serve you ! You require them, upon 
joining, to believe all you have enacted in the Discipline, and 
all you may see fit to ordain ! To believe every doctrine 
and observe every rite most religiously, until you enact the 
opposite doctrine and a different rite, and then they are as 
religiously to believe and observe that ! This is one of the 
popish features in your Discipline, and a most abominable 
one too. Say not another word — and let no Methodist say 
another word- — against the credulity of Roman Catholics, and 
their faith in the Pope and the priests, and their duty to yield 
implicit obedience to all the clergy enjoin, until this doctrine 
is purged from your Book of Discipline. 

Your Friday fast is another popish feature, and borrowed 
from Rome. 

The Pope appoints for fast days " one meal." 

" Every Friday in Advent," &c. 

To abstain from flesh. "All Fridays" See Manual, pp. 
29, 30. 



332 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

Now turn to the very 29th page of Methodist Discipline. 
'• It is expected of all who desire to continue in these societies 
to evidence their desire of salvation by 'fasting or abstinence.' " 
Fast when % Upon any particular day % Yes, sir, apon a 
very particular day. ;t He [the preacher in charge] shall 
take care that a fast be held in every society in his circuit 
on the Friday preceding every quarterly meeting." — P. 62. 

Law given to the bands December 25, 1744, " To ob- 
serve as days of fasting or abstinence, all Fridays in the 
year."— Dis. p. 84. 

But for what purpose are these stated fasts and abstinences 
so authoritatively enacted by the Komish Church'? For 
penance ! She requires of her priests to " fast oft." and if 
they would attain to great sanctity of life, to fast as much as 
health and strength will permit ; and even flagellations are 
advised for the same end. Read the lives of the monks and 
ascetics, &c. Well, what duty does the Discipline enjoin 
upon Methodist ministers 1 

Fasting ! "Do you use as much abstinence and fasting 
every week, as your health, strength and labor will permit ? n ! ! 

Now, the penance of fasting is made a religious duty to 
the Catholic. When he comes to the confessional, he is put 
upon his conscience to confess if he has kept the Friday and 
other fasts. He is asked, ' ; Have you neglected to perform 
the penance enjoined in confession V " Have you presumed 
to receive the blessed communion having broken your fast 1 ?" 
And how is it with the Methodist 1 When he conies to the 
band meeting, which is a substitute for the Romish confes- 
sional, he, too, is also put upon his conscience concerning the 
Friday fasts." See Dis. p. 84, directions given to band 
societies. 

" To observe as days of fasting or abstinence all Fridays 
in the year." 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 333 

Now, these Friday fasts are enjoined by the Discipline, 
are among the directions given to the band societies, and 
each member gave " satisfactory assurances of his willingness 
to observe and keep the rules of the Church" (Dis., p. 30), 
when he joined the Church. Therefore, to violate this rule 
is to violate his solemn pledge and vow, which is sin, or a 
" fault," at least. One of the questions to be asked in the 
"band" is, "What known sins have you committed since 
our last meeting ?" 

But you may say, " It is proper to fast, and the Scriptures 
exhort us to fast." 

Grant it ; but they nowhere command Christians to fast 
on Friday, and upon every Friday in the year. Nor can 
you find an instance where any one fasted on Friday, within 
the lids of the New Testament. 

It is the Romish principle to which I object — the observ- 
ance of days, and this arbitrary enactment of a law to ob- 
serve every Friday in the year as a fast day, and making it 
as sacred a duty to keep it as to keep the Christian Sabbath. 
And then it is evident to all that it requires equal authority 
to command men to abstain from food one day in the week, as 
to abstain from work. God alone has the right to enjoin such 
a law ; and for man to do it is to usurp the prerogatives of 
the great God. 

You, sir, and your ministers in General Conference assem- 
bled, have as good a right to command the Congress of the 
United States to fast every Friday, on pain of expulsion 
at your hands from their places, as to lay your commands 
upon the Church of Christ, and enact that its members shall 
fast every Friday in the year, or by you be excluded from 
their citizenship in the kingdom of Christ. 

You have as good a right to enact in your next General 
Conference that every adult man and woman shall kneel at 



334 THE GUEAT IKON WHEEL. 

sunrise each Friday, and say a " Pater noster," or be ban- 
ished out of the State, as to lay such a command upon the 
members of Christ's commonwealth. You might say, " It 
is but a good thing we enjoin." Grant it. It is a good thing 
to rise at sunrise, and it is a very good thing to say the Lord's 
prayer, if in sincerity and truth, and it is proper to kneel 
when we pray, but it is a most presumptuous act of high- 
handed and despotic authority for a congress of Methodist 
preachers to say that every Tennesseean shall kneel at sun- 
rise every Friday morning and say the Lord's prayer. Who 
gave you the right to command us % Such arbitrary dic- 
tation on your part would be in violation of the genius of 
our government and the Constitution, and for a Tennesseean 
to acknowledge your authority over him, would be a virtual 
acknowledgment of the supremacy of your authority over 
that of the State, and of the United States. So the Christian 
man or woman who submits to such human authority, not 
only rejects that of Christ, but virtually acknowledges that 
the authority of ministers is above that of Christ. 

You have as good a right to say I shall feast every Satur- 
day, as that I shall fast every Friday, since you may grant 
an indulgence as rightfully as command a penance. You 
have as good a right, and it would be as proper for you, to 
say that I shall eat beef on Monday, pork on Tuesday, fish 
on Wednesday, and fowl on Thursday, as that I shall eat 
nothing on Friday. It is one of the anti-Christian preroga- 
tives of the Man of Sin you have usurped. 

What have I to do with Romish penance % and what has 
a Protestant to do with penance 1 For me or any Christian 
to acknowledge your authority in this thing, and to obey 
you, would be endorsing and approving a tradition of Rome 
— penance. Protestant penance is as wicked and anti-Chris- 
tian as Popish penance. 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 335 

Then to enjoin a Friday fast, on pain of rebuke and exclu- 
sion, is to usurp one of the anti-Christian prerogatives of the 
Man of Sin ; and to submit to such an observance is a sin 
against Jesus Christ. 



LETTER XXVII. 



The Discipline — Its Popish Liturgy — Its Marriage Service 
borrowed from the Romish Church — The Mummeries of 
Rome Protestantized. 

Dear Sir : — A child will possess some of the features of 
its mother. The Liturgy of the Discipline does possess 
many of the features of the Roman Sacramentary. In ad- 
dition to those features mentioned in the last letter, to illus- 
trate more fully my meaning, I take the " marriage service." 
From what source is the marriage service of your Discipline 
borrowed, almost word for word 1 I answer, from the ser- 
vice of the Romish Church. Some few of the extras of that 
service are omitted, as the cross, &c, and the prayers modi- 
fied. Let us compare them. 

Romish Service. 

The priest asks the bridegroom (who must stand at the 
right hand of the woman), " N., wilt thou take N., here pres- 
ent, for thy lawful wife, according to the rite of our holy 
mother Church 1 " The man shall answer, " I will." 

The priest puts the same question to the bride, and re- 
ceives the same answer. 

Methodist Service. 
The minister asks the man, standing on the right hand of 
the bride, " M., "Wilt thou have this woman to thy wedded 

<886) 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED, 337 

wife, to live together after God's ordinance, in the holy 
estate of matrimony % Wilt thou love her, comfort her, 
honor, and keep her, in sickness and in health ; and, forsak- 
ing all other, keep thee only unto her, so long as ye both 
shall live? " The man shall answer, " I will." 

The same question is put to the bride. 

The reader can see that this part is much longer than the 
Romish service, and more objectionable. 

Romish. 

Here is the vow : "I, N., take thee, N., to be my wedded 
wife, to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, 
for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, 
till death do us part, if holy Church will it permit, and 
thereto I plight thee my troth." 

Then they loose their hands, and, joining them again, the 
woman says after the priest, — 

" I, N., take thee, N., to be my wedded husband, to have 
and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for 
richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, till death do us 
part, if holy Church will it permit, and thereto I plight thee 
my troth*" 

Methodist Service. 

The man says after his minister, " I, M., take thee, N., to 
be my wedded wife, to have and to hold, from this day for- 
ward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness 
and in health, to love and to cherish, till death us do part, 
according to God's holy ordinance ; and thereto I plight 
thee my faith." 

Then shall they loose their hands, and the woman, with her 
right hand taking the man by his right hand, shall say after 
the minister,-— 

io 



388 THE GJLIEAT IRON WHEEL. 

" I, N., take thee M., to be my wedded husband, to have 
and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for 
richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love, cherish, 
and to obey, till death us do part, according to God's holy 
ordinance ; and thereto I give thee my faith." — Dis. pp. 
151, 152. 
• Why, sir, omitting one expression, I far prefer the Rom- 
ish ceremony to your deformed copy of it ; and one thing 
I do know, so long as I am an American Christian, no 
Methodist minister shall rehearse his Romish service over 
me, living, marrying, or dead— if my wish is respected when 
1 am no more. When I want to be married with a Romish 
service, I will go to the Church of Rome, whose rightful 
property it is. I will not receive stolen goods, or contra- 
band merchandise. Why not let Rome hold and use her own 
Liturgy 1 What have Christians to do with her trumpery 1 
I have compared the Liturgy of the Discipline with the 
Liturgy of the Pope only in one particular. Those who 
have the time can compare the Methodist service for the 
"ministration of baptism," "the burial service," " the ad- 
ministration of the supper," and " prayer of consecration," 
and the form and manner of ordination of ministers, inferior 
and superior, and the oaths enjoined, if they wish to be con- 
vinced how much of Rome they ignorantly worship. 

Methodists unwillingly acknowledge the very principles, 
and adopt almost the very forms, in their Liturgy, that they 
condemn in the "poor, deluded followers of the Man of 
Sin." 

Do you say, " These services are not operative now — they 
have become obsolete ? " W]iy not then expunge them from 
your Discipline 1 ? W^hy compel every minister to whom 
you administer the vow of ordination, to solemnly pledge 
himself to observe them — to mind, not mend, your rules — to 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 389 

observe every point, great and small, in the Discipline % If 
that minister be a conscientious man, true to his vow, he 
will observe the Friday fasts, according to the Discipline, 
and enjoin the band meeting, marry the living and bury the 
dead, and baptize infants and adults, and administer the sup- 
per,. according to the popish Liturgy of the Discipline ; and 
if any Methodist minister does not so observe his Discipline, 
he is a perjured man ; he has sworn and performs not ; he 
lives in open violat'on of his solemn vows, and is obnoxious 
to trial and exclusion. Do you say, " Forms are proper in 
the Church?" Very well. But forms that are enjoined by 
an inviolable law are sinful, both in their appointment and 
observance; for the prerogative of the "Man of Sin" is 
acknowledged and submitted to. To concede to ministers 
the power to ordain whatever forms, and rites, and cere- 
monies they may think proper, is yielding to them a most 
fearfully dangerous power — the very power arrogated to him- 
self by the Pope. To concede to ministers such prerogatives 
is to exalt them to an equality with Jesus Christ, and to vio- 
late and disregard his positive commands and injunctions ; to 
obey theirs, is to exalt them above Christ, and to say they are 
more to be reverenced, loved, and feared than the Saviour. 

The Presbyterian editor to whom allusion has been made, 
shows up the borrowed plumage of the Discipline. He 
thinks all the improvements upon the Romish Liturgy 
have been made by Episcopalians, and, therefore, belong to 
them, and they alone have a right to complain that Method- 
ists have borrowed their finery, to give Episcopal character 
to their Liturgv. 

" The Discipline — Borrowed Plumage. 
% Methodism is not Episcopal. What right has it, then, to 
Episcopal forms and orders in baptism, matrimony, the 



3-iO THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

burial of the dead, the Lord's supper, and the manner of 
making and ordaining bishops, elders, and deacons'? All 
this is borrowed plumage. Part of it is unmeaning, moth- 
eaten finery, hung up in the Discipline, and another part the 
sheerest mummery. First, Methodists are not Episcopalians. 
What right have they, then, to i the ministration of baptism? 
as contained in their Discipline 1 It is borrowed from the 
Episcopal Prayer-Book. And it is unmeaning finery. For 
what is the object of baptism 1 Episcopalians regard bap- 
tism as ' the only rite of initiation into the Church of God.' 
Presbyterians also say, it is ' the solemn admission of the 
party baptized into the visible Church.' But it has no such 
place in Methodism. Joining a class is the right of admis- 
sion into Methodism. And not attending class is preemi- 
nently exclusion from the Church. Well, is baptism ad- 
ministered to persons who join the class % No. How long 
may they remain in class, and have all the privileges of 
Methodism without baptism ? Six months ? six years 1 or 
sixty ? How many unbaptized seekers are in the Methodist 
Church 1 Bishop Jayne says there are 50,000 seekers in 
the Church North ! How many in the Church South \ 
The ministration of baptism, then, in the Discipline, is bor- 
rowed plumage ; and it is very much an unmeaning 
finery. 

" Again : Methodists are not Episcopalians. What right 
have they, then, to ' the solemnization of marriage? as in 
their Discipline ? It is borrowed from the Episcopal Prayer- 
Book ; and it is unmeaning finery. Do Methodist preachers 
perform that splendid ceremony ? We do not know how it 
may be on all occasions. But we once witnessed the cele- 
bration as it was done by one of the brethren. The trem- 
bling couple stood up. They had no need to tremble long. 
1 Join hands,' said the preacher. ' In the name of the Lord, 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 841 

I pronounce you husband and wife. O Lord ! as thou hast 
made these two one flesh, grant them thy blessing. Amen ! 
Take your seats ! ' We may have failed in the very words ; 
we have not missed the time many seconds. A Churchman 
would have wondered if that was meant for Episcopacy. 
Certainly, it was the funniest, little odd-come-short marriage 
rite we ever witnessed ; and entirely eclipses the shortest 
of the short of our attempts in marrying a deaf and dumb 
man. 

" Again : Methodists are not Episcopalians. What right, 
then, have they to ' the order for the burial of the dead ,' as 
in the Discipline ] It is borrowed from the Episcopal 
Prayer-Book ; and it is finery hung up for show in the Dis- 
cipline. But in the place of it, there is, after due time and 
notice, a funeral sermon, And, be it said, this funeral sermon, 
in practical influence, is becoming like the Roman Catholic 
mass for the dead. This sermon is preached for the asking. 
And friends expect the preacher to put the souls of their dead 
at rest in heaven. This sermon, in some places, seems to be 
necessary to the consummation of the funeral. We were 
asked once in these very words — ' Will you go to-day to 

Mr. 's funeral V ' His funeral ! ' said we. ' Why, we 

thought he died a year ago V ' yes,' said our neighbor — 
I he died then, but he has never had his funeral yet V We 
give another illustration, right to the point. A man had 
shaken hands with a Methodist preacher and joined class — 
then fell back — lived as before for a considerable time, and 
died in delirious fever, absolutely preventing all conversation 
with him. By request, we preached at the grave a prepared 
sermon with all proper and yet guarded delicacy of allusion 
to the dead. But it would not do at all. Months after, 
a high funeral sermon was offered up, and the friends came 
away with their minds at rest. This evil is not, however, 



342 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

confined to the Methodist Church. It. exists elsewhere, and 
needs to be arrested. Man now, as ever, loves extreme unc- 
tion and the mass for the dead. 

" Again : Methodists are not Episcopalians. What right, 
then, have they to ' the order for the administration of the 
Lord's supper,' as in the Discipline ? It is borrowed from 
the Episcopal Prayer-Book ; and is finery hung up for show 
in the Discipline. The Lord's supper has august regard paid 
to it in the Episcopal Church. It is the day of days — the 
time of times. But what and where is the supper in Method- 
ism ? Did any body ever hear a Methodist speak with any 
interest of expecting to approach, or having been at, the 
Lord's table 1 Does it not evidently fill a place in the mind 
of a Methodist greatly below the class meeting and the love 
fast — to say nothing of the shout and the bodily exercise? 
Does the Lord's supper occupy, in Methodist meetings, a 
time and place fully known to all 1 Is it not postponed for 
frivolous reasons, shuffled aside, and poked away in a corner? 
And when administered, how often may the elder feel 
' ; straitened for time J and ' omit any part of the service except 
the prayer of consecration? that the altar and the straw may 
be prepared for more exciting exercises ? 

" Lastly : Methodists are not Episcopalians. What right, 
then, have they to ' the form and manner of making and or- 
daining of bishops, elders, and deacons? as in the Discipline ? 
All this is borrowed from the Episcopal Prayer-Book ; and it 
is not only borrowed plumage — it is the grossest mummery. 
Presbyterians reject Episcopacy in all its claims. But they 
can respect the faith of those who believe they trace prelatieal 
mystery back two thousand years. And our imagination 
may even kindle with theirs, when they look upon the kneel- 
ing man and the mitred dignitary whose hand corrmiunicates, 
as they think, power and grace from Christ, and Paul, 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED, 343 

and Clement, and Gregory, and Cranmer, and Tillotson, to 
rule the flock. Just as we can honor loyalty, or admire 
some noble Percy, as his heart swells, and eye gleams 
over the heraldic shield which has come down to him, borne 
upon the breast of belted earls through glittering lances, and 
shadowy plumes, and banners of ancestral glory. We can 
feel that all this is in keeping with Europe, and the monarch, 
and the military noble, and the Established Church. But we 
would have no sympathy at all, if we saw a Tennesseean, 
at a British coronation, astride an English war-horse, wield- 
ing the battle-axe of Richard, and playing the part of cham- 
pion for the king in the gaudy show. We would open our 
eyes, and cry out, ' Jonathan, what business have you there V 
And so, when we see strait-breasted Mr. Stubblefield, the 
Methodist preacher, made a bishop by some Francis Asbury 
or Lorenzo Dow, we cannot help thinking of the daw and 
the peacock's feathers, or other fable about borrowed honors, 
or of old Mr. Burchell, in the Vicar of Wakefield, when he 
said fudge to certain persons pretending to be fine ladies 
from London. 

" And when Methodist divines are clothing one of their 
number with Episcopal orders, there is a particular thing in 
the ceremony worse than fudge. Eor, what do the preach- 
ers mean when they utter these words, ' Receive the Holy 
Ghost] at the ordination of their bishops ? We know what 
Episcopalians mean. They understand that the grace of apos- 
tolic succession is thus conveyed. Now, Presbyterians can 
hardly acquit Episcopalians of impiety in the consecration 
of a bishop ; because these words, as we receive them, are 
never used in the Scriptures but to express miraculous power 
communicated by inspired hands. What, then, is it but some- 
thing akin to blasphemy, when Methodist ministers, in their 
Episcopal mummery, say these words ? " 



344 THE GREAT {RON WHEEL. 

If all the above mummery is not binding, expunge it — 
expurgate these popish features. Christianize and Ameri- 
canize your Discipline, if you intend to urge its acceptance, 
or a respect for it upon American Christians. Your Liturgy 
is the image of the Romish, and you thus cause your follow 
ers to worship the beast in his image, 



LETTER XXVIII. 



"And there were added to the Church daily (Gr. Soudzomenous) the saved." — Acts ii. 

The Popish features of the Discipline — Unscriptural terms of 
admission — The Societies used as draff-nets to sweep the 
world into the Methodist Church. 

Dear Sir : — It must be admitted that the published stand- 
ards of a Church, as its Confession, Creed, Discipline, &c, 
faithfully represent the faith and practice of that Church. It 
is understood that these creeds and Discipline are the pro- 
perty of the public, and open to examination and criticism. 
Of this, no denomination can justly complain, unless its 
creed is misrepresented ; and then correction is admissible. 
It is my design to state all your doctrines with the utmost 
fairness, and if I am misled, J charge the fault upon your 
own standard writers. 

I repudiate your conditions of admission into your socie- 
ties, provided you claim that they are Scriptural churches. 
Your conditions of admission are essentially Popish, and 
are indeed more objectionable than those of the Romish 
apostacy. Your very conditions of admission prove your 
societies to be no churches, in a scriptural sense. 

It would be useless for me to prove, what is so conspicu- 
ously taught in the whole New Testament, that the universal 
condition of Church membership is personal faith in Christ 
Jesus. Upon a satisfactory statement of this, the candidate 
is received into Christian fellowship, and, upon a public 
15* (8«) 



346 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

profession of it in baptism, into Church fellowship. The 
Scriptures everywhere teach that the churches of Christ 
were composed of baptized believers ; not only giving no 
warrant for, but forbidding, the admission of any other cha- 
racter. 

(1.) John, whose ministry was the beginning of the gospel 
of Christ (Mark i. 1.), baptized only upon a profession of 
repentance and faith in the Christ to come (Mark i. 7. 
Acts xix. 4). 

(2.) Jesus made and baptized all the disciples he received. 

(3.) He enjoined in his last commission : 1st. Preaching 
or discipling. 2d. Baptism to those believing ; and this speci- 
fication of baptism to one particular class, is equivalent to a 
prohibition of it to any other class.* 3d. Teaching the ob- 
servance of all he had commanded. 

(4.) We have the example of the apostles. The apos- 
tles preach the gospel, " and they that gladly received the 
word were baptized." "And the Lord added unto the Church 
daily {sodzomenous) the saved ;" i. e., believers in Christ, for 
such are saved. " Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou 
shalt be saved." 

(5.) The apostles addressed the primitive churches as 
companies of justified, sanctified persons: "Paul, unto the 
Church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sancti- 
fied in Christ Jesus, called to be saints," and numerous like 
passages. 

(6.) Paul distinctly forbade the Church at Corinth to in- 
troduce unbelievers (i. e., infidels) and non-believers into the 
Church. "Be ye not unequally yoked together [like associating 
in Church relation] with unbelievers; for what fellowship hath 



* According to that principle of common law, Expressio unius est 
exclusio alterius. 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 347 

righteousness with unrighteousness ? and what communion 
hath light with darkness ?* and what concord hath Christ with 
Belial 1 or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel 
[i. e., unbeliever] 1 And what agreement hath the temple 
[the Church] of God with idols ? for ye are the temple of 
the living God, as God hath said, J will dwell in them, and 
walk in them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my 
people. Wherefore, come out from among them, and be ye 
separate, saith the Lord." 

. If the unregenerate and unbelieving are to be mingled in- 
discriminately with the saints in the Church, and partake of 
its privileges, the line between the world and the Church is 
blotted out, and there is, and can be, no separation between 
the parties. But why this proof, when your own Confession 
rightly defines a true Church in these words? — 

"The visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faith- 
ful men, in which the pure word of God is preached, and 
the sacraments duly administered," &c; i. e., an association 
of believers, and of course of professed believers only. This 
definition is adopted from the Articles of the Church of 
England, and agrees with that of Augsburg, Suveland, 
Savoy, and indeed all the " Protestant churches," save the 
Presbyterian, which defines it to be composed of all believ- 
ers and their children ! 

Your definition of a Christian Church is correct, but you 
render it of none effect by your traditions. Indeed, if your 
definition be correct, then your societies have no just claims 
to be considered churches. They are not congregations of 
" faithful men" — of believers. They are not congregations 
of even professed believers. A profession of faith is not re- 

*Is not this a good commentary upon the terms " light" and "dark- 
ness?" ic Y3 were once darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord." 



348 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

quired of any as a condition of uniting with your societies. 
None of the members of your societies, therefore, need ne- 
cessarily to be professed believers. They can live and die 
members of your societies, enjoying all the privileges of 
them, and never profess regeneration of heart ! Am I mis- 
taken ? To the law and statute-book : ^ 

" (4.) There is only one condition previously required of 
those who desire admission into these societies, ' a desire 
to flee from the wrath to come, and to be saved from their 
sins.' But wherever this is really fixed in the soul, it will 
be shown by its fruits. It is therefore expected of all who 
continue therein, that they should continue to evidence their 
desire of salvation, 

11 First, By doing no harm, by avoiding evil of every kind, 
especially that which is most generally practised ; such as, 

" The taking of the name of God in vain. 

" The profaning the day of the Lord, either by doing ordi- 
nary work therein, or by buying or selling. 

" Drunkenness, buying or selling spirituous liquors, or 
drinking them, unless in cases of extreme necessity. 

"The buying and selling of men, women and children, with 
an intention to enslave them. 

"Fighting, quarrelling, brawling, brother going to law with 
brother ; returning evil for evil ; or railing for railing ; the 
using many words in buying or selling. 

" The buying or selling of goods that have not paid the 
duty. 

"The giving or taking things on usury, i. e., unlawful 
interest. 

"Uncharitable or unprofitable conversation; particularly 
speaking evil of magistrates or of ministers," &c, &c. 

A long list of rules for external observance ; but " repent- 
ance toward God. and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ" 19 not 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 349 

once required as a condition of either joining them or remain- 
ing in them. 

But it may be urged, that before one can join the Church 
proper, he must make a profession of personal faith, since 
the Discipline, Part I., Sec. ii., gives this " direction for re- 
ceiving members into the Church." 

i( Q. 1. How shall we prevent improper persons from 
insinuating themselves into the Church? 

a A. 1. Let none be received into the Church until they are 
recommended by a leader with whom they have met at least six 
months on trial, and have been baptized ; and shall on exami- 
nation by the minister in charge, before the Church, give satis- 
factory assurances both of the correctness of their faith, and 
their willingness to observe and keep the rules of the Church" 

I confess I am unable to see the practical bearing of these 
directions. 

1. The applicants for Church membership, to be received, 
must have met in the class on trial for at least six months ; 
but they are not required ever to join the Church if they 
do not see fit : they can simply remain members of the soci- 
ety by professing a desire to flee the wrath to come, for six 
months, six years, or sixty years, and multitudes remain 
their whole lives in the societies, as seekers or probationers. 

2. They must give " satisfactory assurances of the correct- 
ness of their faithP What this faith is I am not informed, 
unless it be the Apostles' Creed, to which they are required 
to subscribe, if baptized in "riper years." 

3. They must give satisfactory assurances of their willing- 
ness to observe and keep the rules of the Church. 

These are the three conditions of joining the Church. But 
is not this " Church" a purely imaginary body % Is not the 
member of the " society," to all intents and purposes, a mem- 
ber of the Methodist Church 1 Is he not the recipient of all its 



350 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

rites (for rights it allows of none) and immunities ? Your 
children were duly sprinkled in infancy, and thus given 
to the Church. At the first camp-meeting they attended, 
after coming to years of discretion, they allowed their names 
to be enrolled upon the class-paper as seekers-they joined 
the Methodist " society." They are now urged, in common 
with all seekers, to partake of the Supper as a means of 
. ^ -means of regeneration! The preacher in charge 
assures the seekers, who know they are unfit to partic- 
pat, in the sacred ordinance, that if he ever was converted 
to God it was in the very act of eating the Lords Supper! 
They as seekers, are persuaded to partake. Now, sir, what 
privilege has a member of the Methodist Church that the 
seeker does not equally enjoy « 

1. Has the Church member been baptized? So has the 
seeker, and both in infancy. 

2 Can his children be baptized? So can the seeker s. 

3. Can he and must he attend "class?" So can and 

must the seeker. 

4. Can and must he pay his quarterage? So can and 

must the seeker. 

5 Can he fall from grace? So can the seeker. 

6. Can he eat the Supper? So can the seeker (provided 
we admit that Methodist societies are true churches). 

7 Are the professing believers-these Church members- 
counted as such, in your statistics? So are the non-profess- 

ins seekers. 

8 Do you claim for the believing Church member the 
right to commune with Presbyterians and Baptists ? You 
claim the same right for the non-believing seeker ! 

Tell me sir, from what immunities or duties incumbent 
upon a member of the "Church" is the impenitent or unre- 
crenerate seeker debarred? Wherein do they differ in the 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 851 

sight of Methodism ? Is there any office, any rite or cere- 
mony, by which an accepted seeker passes to the degree of 
member in full % — any act of confirmation, or ceremony that 
answers to it? None whatever. Are the members con- 
sulted, to know at what point they can fellowship him as a 
brother Methodist? No. The preacher simply reads out 
the name of the seeker in the congregration as one whom he 
and his class-leader have decided to be worthy of the consider- 
ation of member in full ! Is not this " Church" mentioned 
in Part I. Sec. ii., a purely imaginary body ? Has Method- 
ism a Church within a Church % 

You may know why Baptists refuse to recognize your 
societies as churches. 

They lack this one of the essential elements of Christian 
churches, i. e., That all the members must be professed 
believers — profess a 'personal interest in the atonement of 
Jesus Christ. 

So long as you admit and retain confessedly non-believers 
and the professedly unregenerate as legitimate members of 
your societies, Baptists, at least, can never recognize them as 
gospel churches, receive their ordinances as Church ordinances, 
or endorse their ministers before the world as legitimate 
Church officers. And they would be inconsistent should 
they do it — encouraging, as they would, the amalgamation 
of the world and the Church. 



LETTER XXIX. 



Seehership — Its unscripturalness — Its pernicious tendency — 
The Testimony of a Presbyterian. 

Dear Sir : — In my last letter I urged the unscripturalness 
of your doctrine of seekership and probation. Contrary to the 
express teachings and every example in the New Testament, 
the sinner is urged forward into the Church, and partakes of 
the sacred Supper, as a means of regeneration, while the 
Christian is debarred from joining the Church and baptism, 
until he has been six months under the drill of a class-leader, 
and given full proof of his entire willingness to obey the 
Discipline, and of his perfect tractability and obedience to the 
rulers who have assumed "the charge and government" over 
him. That you may see that I am not alone in looking upon 
seekership and probation as both grossly unscriptural and 
highly pernicious, and also to permit you and the world to 
see in what light Presbyterians regard such practices, I sub- 
mit the following able article from the Calvinistic Magazine, 
written over the nom de plume of " Reformer :" 

" Our Methodist brethren sometimes tell us, that Luther, 
and Calvin, and Wesley, were reformers. Why Luther and 
Calvin were called reformers, we all understand. And these 
brethren tell us, that Wesley is entitled to this appellation, 
because that, when he came, he found the established Church 
of England (the Episcopalian, of which he lived and died a 
member), from its connection with the State, so encumbered 
with sinners, so much secularized, so formal, and so almost I 
entirely lost to the spirit and power of vital Christianity, that' 
he felt it to be his duty to attempt its reformation, and that 






CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 353 

God so far blessed him in this endeavor, as to entitle him to 
be ranked among the most illustrious reformers. Without 
saying yea or nay to all this, 

i; The charge which we have to prefer against modern Meth- 
odists, both Episcopal and Protestant, is, that by their mea- 
sures, or Church policy, they are fast bringing about a worse 
state of things than that which they tell us Wesley came to 
reform. 

" This is a heavy charge, and, if true, ought to alarm every 
lover of vital piety, especially if he be within the pale of 
either of these churches, and cause him immediately to strike 
for reform. 

"And I here declare, that it is more with the hope of ex- 
citing to reformation the Christian members of these churches, 
than with the desire of exhibiting to the public gaze their 
deformities, that I attempt this exposition. 

" To see ' Methodism as it is,' it would be necessary to 
survey minutely its doctrines, its discipline, and its measures. 
In doctrines, the Episcopal and Protestant Methodists are un- 
derstood to agree, and are Arminian. In discipline, which 
more nearly concerns us all than peculiarities of doctrine, the 
Episcopal Methodists are confessedly anti-republican — the 
Protestants are republican. 

" Passing these, with this brief notice, it is my purpose to 
dwell more at length upon their measures. Nor do I intend 
to speak of all these. I am aiming to speak of their practice 
of receiving seekers to the Church, and afterwards confirm- 
ing these seekers members of the Church. 

'' The Episcopal Methodists receive seekers on six months' 
trial— the Protestants on four. Both receive every body, 
whether saint or sinner, upon probation. The Christian is 
required to undergo the same trial as the sinner, and to re- 
ceive a recommendation from his class-leader, before he can 



354 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

be confirmed a member of the Church, or admitted to bap- 
tism. 

" There is no warrant in the word cf God, either from pre- 
cept or example, for keeping the Christian back, or bringing 
the sinner forward, after this manner. The practice is an 
innovation. In apostolic times, believers were added to the 
Church 'the same day' on which they believed. 'If thou 
believest with all thy heart thou mayest' be baptized, said 
Philip to the eunuch. Avowed unbelievers were not added 
at all, nor is there any propriety in adding them now. Are 
they not free agents % and has not God said, they that seek 
shall find ? 'Ask and it shall be given unto you, seek and 
ye shall find, knock and it shall be opened unto you.' But 
when shall they find ? So soon as they seek aright. ' To- 
day if ye will here his voice, harden not your hearts.' JVow, 
then, is God's time, and by allowing four or six months to 
the sinner to repent in, they who do it do virtually alter 
God's time, and thereby assist the sinner in the soul-ruining 
practice of procrastination. But I am too fast. 

" The time is allowed him, not so much to seek religion 
in, as to try whether he would like to be a Methodist. 
Thus, while God would put the sinner to seeking Him. they 
set him to seeking them. This is evident from the fact, that 
the Christian is required to undergo the same trial as the 
sinner, and that the sinner is confirmed at the end of his pro- 
bation, without even a profession of religion. The Christian 
needed not to seek for religion, for that he had already, and 
the sinner is received without it. It is not a trial for religion, 
then, so much as a trial for Church membership, that is re- 
quired of the seeker. One unacquainted with this fact, would 
naturally suppose, that the seeker must necessarily turn into 
the finder, within the time of his probation, or stand aside, 
or stand back ; b it not so — he is urged forward into full fel- 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 855 

lowship (I do not say communion, for he enjoyed that 
before), and made entitled to all the privileges and immuni- 
ties of the Church, while he proclaims himself unregene- 
rate ! 

" The distinction between the righteous and the wicked is 
no more regarded during the state of confirmation, than that 
of probation. The Christian member and the sinner member 
are on a perfect level throughout. If any one doubts this, 
he may satisfy himself of its truth, by inquiring of the mem- 
bers of the Methodist churches within his acquaintance, and 
he will find that threerfourths, more or less, of the regular 
members of these churches, will frankly own that they never 
had religion. Ask not if they love God and their neighbor, 
or if they believe and have repented, for all this they are 
taught they may do, while in an unrenewed state ; — but ask 
plumply, have you, got, or do you believe you ever had, 
religion ? Or notice, if you please, what becomes of the 
multitudes of seekers who join these churches from year to 
year, and inquire at the end of their months, if they have 
professed religion, and you will soon learn that what I say 
is true. Many of them will pass from the state of probation 
to that of confirmation, as silently, as unobservedly, and 
with as little change, as one period of time passes into 
another. If, however, any deny this, let me be put upon the 
proof of it. 

"But our Methodist brethren are impatient to ask, are there 
not hypocrites and self-deceived souls in all churches ? Yes, 
and therefore in yours also. But these are not the classes 
of persons of whom I am speaking. I am talking about that 
large class of persons who enter regularly into your churches, 
and whose presence is approved there as life members, with- 
out even a profession cf religion. They have laid aside the 
business and character of seekers, and are Methodists ; not, 



356 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

strictly speaking, hypocrites, nor self-deceived, nor the fallen 
from grace, but simply Methodists. 

" Paul asks, and we repeat, ' What part hath he that be- 
"lieveth with an infidel V — an unbeliever, as the term signifies 
— ' or what concord hath Christ with Belial V Luther wrote 
to Melancthon at the Diet of Augsburg, ' I learn that you 
have begun a marvellous work, namely, to put Luther and 
the Pope in harmony ; but the Pope is unwilling, and Luther 
begs to be excused. And if, in spite of them, you succeed 
in this affair, then after your example I will bring together 
Christ and Belial.' Melancthon failed to produce harmony 
between Luther and the Pope, and Luther was relieved from 
showing concord between Christ and Belial ; but our Meth- 
odist brethren have succeeded in harmonizing the believer 
and the unbeliever, the world and the Church, the children of 
Christ and the children of Belial. 

" You ask again, did not Christ suffer publicans and harlots 
to become his followers 1 and are we wiser and better than 
he'? True, he suffered such to walk about after him. He 
only suffered this ; he did not encourage them to believe that 
they were worthy disciples. So far from it, he frequently 
drove them from him, by the. breath of his mouth, as chaff 
is driven before the wind : ' Ye follow me .... for the 
loaves and fishes.' ' My kingdom is not of this world.' 
' The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests, 
but the Son of Man hath not where to lay his head.' ' He 
that forsaketh not all that he hath, cannot be my disciple.' 
On hearing such language as the above, many, from time 
to time, turned back from him. Even his disciples seem to 
have started back with the multitude, who were not called 
his disciples, when he called to them, ' Will ye also go 
away V He made no effort to detain the unworthy. Christ's 
object seems to have been, to suffer as few sinners as pos- 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 357 

sible to be numbered among his disciples proper ; while the 
object of our Methodist brethren seems to be, to receive and 
detain in the Church as many sinners as possible. David's 
heart moved him to go number Israel, and God gave him, 
as a punishment for his ostentation, choice between war, 
pestilence, and famine. Are you better than David % Not 
so good, if the above report be true, for David sought only 
to number Israel ; but you number the Canaanites also. 

"Such conduct is disorderly. He who would please God, 
must not only obey all of his commandments, but must obey 
them in the order in which they are enjoined. There is a 
first, second, third, &c, duty ; and he who, from dislike to 
the first, should busy himself about the second, would not 
only displease God, but would labor in vain. Especially 
would this be the case, if the right performance of the second 
depended upon the previous performance of the first. The 
farmer who should busy himself in the spring season of the 
year, in hoeing his fields, or in making motions as if he were 
gathering his fodder or his corn, while he had neither broken 
up his ground nor planted his corn, would be, to say the 
least, thought very much out of order. Much more so the 
too-hasty sinner. His first and most obvious duty is, to 
repent scripturally ; after that, join the Church ; then cele- 
brate the sacrament of the Supper ; but if he skip over the 
first duty, and attempt the performance of following ones, 
he will find himself in the awkward and sinful predicament 
of one attempting to do, while a sinner, those duties which 
the Christian alone can rightly perform. 

" To encourage sinners to such a course of conduct, even 
temporarily, is extremely irregular ; but to make it the per- 
manent order of the Church, is monstrous. We could easily 
forgive our brethren for the former practice, but the latter 
is next to unpardonable in a Church that seems to make so 



358 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

much of Christian experience, and to arrogate to itself almost 
all the religion that is going in the land. 

i: You interpose once more, that multitudes have joined 
your churches as seekers, who have afterwards been con- 
verted, and become burning and shining lights in the Church. 

" This can prove no more than that joining the churches as 
a seeker, is not the unpardonable sin. Greater multitudes 
who have joined your churches as seekers, have received 
confirmation without conversion, and afterwards became 
stumbling-blocks in the Church, over which multitudes of sin- 
ners have, in all probability, stumbled into hell. And yet 
greater multitudes who have joined your churches as seekers, 
have soon turned, like ' the sow that was washed to her wal- 
lowing in the mire, or like the dog to his vomit again.' 
Multitudes, I may be permitted to say, have been converted 
before they joined any Church, and have afterwards become 
burning and shining lights in other churches. This we think 
a far more excellent way, for the following additional rea- 
sons : Because, 

"The practice which we are combating is fraught with 
incalculable evil to sinners themselves, to the Methodist 
churches, and to all other churches who receive to their com- 
munion those only who have made a credible profession of 
religion. 

"1. It is often ruinous to sinners. 

" When the sinner is awakened he begins anxiously to in- 
quire, not what he must do to be saved, but what he can do 
tOrmake himself better, and thereby render himself worthy 
of salvation. The poet has told him, 

' If you tarry 'till you 're better 

You will never come at all ; 
Not the righteous — 

Sinners Jesus came to call.' 






CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 359 

' ; This he remembers and thinks upon. God urges him. 
He hesitates. God commands him to submit immediately. 
He trembles. At this critical moment (for this is the best 
time to make members) a time-serving Church approaches, 
and proposes a truce of four or six months between the 
pertinacious sinner and his inflexible sovereign. Come join 
the Church, say they, and at the end of your probation we 
will receive you, whether God does or not. This is an 
understood fact. The sinner will do any thing rather than 
give God his heart noiu, and he flies to this relief. He gives 
them his hand, when he ought to be giving his heart to God, 
and this affords temporary relief. This, he is told, is the 
first step. Several other steps, seeming to rise one above 
another, are now pointed out to him, which, he is told, it is 
his duty to take. Some of these, and the most important, 
are, taking the sacrament, attending class- meeting, &c. The 
seeker sets about this service in as good earnest, perhaps, as 
poor Luther did when he attempted to ascend ' Pilate's 
Staircase' upon his bare knees, and for the same purpose, 
namely, to obey his spiritual instructors, and to fix up a 
righteousness of his own, that will merit salvation. These 
steps, if taken, will conduct him safely into a Methodist 
Church, but if God in mercy do not interpose, and teach 
him as he taught Luther, that ' the just shall live by faith,' 
and cause him to come down from his laborious exaltation, 
and cry with the publican, ' God be merciful to me a sinner,'' 
he will soon take one of two directions, either of which 
will prove equally fatal to him. Either he will grow tired 
of his penance and leave the Church, feeling that he has 
tried it and does not like it ; treat the temperance society 
the same way if he had joined it ; for a time, during camp- 
meeting season, take religion by fits and starts, like a balky 
horse on a slippery hill, and, after a while, like the sullen 



360 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL, 

ox, refuse to go at all. This is one way, and the number 
and the name of those who travel in it is ' Legion.' Or, 

"As he has been given to understand that religion is not 
necessary to Church membership, and as he has been ' in the 
line of his duty' thus far, all that remains for him to do is 
to persevere in the use of the Methodist means, and at the 
end of his probation he takes another step, and finds himself 
snugly seated in a Methodist Church. Preach to the sinner 
now, and you do not touch him, for he is in the Church, and 
in the line of his duty, only he has not yet done enough of 
good works to lay God under obligation to convert him. 
Preach to the probationer, and you do not hit him, for he has 
stood his trial and been approved. Preach to the Christian, 
and you are farther from the mark than ever, for he makes 
no pretensions to Christianity. Preach to the backslider, 
and he is not the man, for he could not slide back from that 
to which he never attained ; and he holds on to his name 
and his place in the Church as ever. In fact, few of those 
who preach to such, either from shame or policy, will venture 
to designate them, and so they get little or no preaching. 
What a munition is this for the sinner ! This is the other 
direction, and of all the ways to hell it is the smoothest and 
the broadest, and many there be who go in thereat. 

" 2. This practice will ultimately prove ruinous to the 
Methodist churches, unless they speedily abandon it. 

"A visible Church is an organized body of professing Christ- 
ians, that has officers and ordinances. An organized body, 
all of whom were non-professors, would not be entitled to 
be called a Church of Jesus Christ. If the greater part of 
its members were non professors, its claims to this appella- 
tion would be proportionally weakened. Therefore, the 
practice of admitting the non-professing elements is suicidal, 
&rl will speedily prove the ruin of those churches, unless 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 361 

abandoned. For, so low are their terms of membership, 
that nothing but a general persecution, and a want of popu- 
larity, could preserve them from an immediate inundation 
of sinner members. Perseverance soon overcomes these, 
in a republican government, and when, by the operation of 
the seeker system, their numbers swell into political import- 
ance, the designing and the ambitious, together with the 
' drift wood of circumstances,' will flow in at every avenue 
and gorge every ' class.' These will import into the Church 
the spirit and maxims of the world, and convert it into a 
politico-ecclesiastical establishment, mighty to boast, and to 
execute vengeance upon all who oppose its self-aggrandizing 
spirit. For it is sinners in the different churches that cause 
them to persecute and sin, and thus bring disgrace upon 
themselves among men, and finally devouring wrath from 
God. Those churches, therefore, which have in them the 
greatest number of sinners, will be the most bigoted, the 
most sectarian, and the most persecuting ; and those 
churches which invite and cordially entertain non-professors 
within their bounds, will be sure to gain more of that element 
than those who do not. When a Church is once full of 
sinners, it is an apostate Church, and if it exist at all, it will 
be with but a name to live while dead : its succession will 
be henceforth ' apostatical' — not apostolical. Again, 

" If the non -professing element is entitled to all the privi- 
leges and immunities of the Church, it may ascend, without 
molestation, from the lowest to the highest grade of office 
in the Church. There is no obstruction to this, so far as 
consistency and practice are concerned. The ' circuit' inveighs 
against our practice of examining men on experimental reli- 
gion preparatory to their admission into the Church ; and 
consistency would forbid it from interposing any ' imperti- 
nent questions' to, or 'sitting in judgment on,' its candi- 
16 



362 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

date for orders. If he entertain ' good desires,' and express 
a willingness to serve God in this way, the Church has high 
authority for permitting it. John Wesley confesses that he 
had no religion until after he had been preaching several 
years as a Methodist preacher, had come to America and es- 
tablished his system of doctrines and discipline, and returned 
to Europe. His brother Charles professed religion about 
the same time. With such examples before them, and no 
obstacle to impede them, being allowed without religion, and 
without much education, to officiate in the Church, is there 
not great danger that those who wield the terrific power of 
the ' Great Iron Wheel' will, at a day not far distant, be 
composed almost entirely of the unregenerate ? ' If the blind 
lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.' 

" The ordinances of the Church, baptism and the Lord's 
Supper, must, in the mean time, partake of the general dis- 
order. Of this we have all had ocular demonstration. We 
have seen the unworthy invited to the table of the Lord. 
We say unworthy, for such are all who are not capable of 
discerning the Lord's body. This none can do without sav- 
ing faith, and this the unregenerate have not. 

" Baptism, the scriptural door into the Church, is already 
woefully desecrated. It is administered, without discrimi- 
nation, to the children of those who are Church members, 
and of those who are not. And yet sinners are admitted to 
seeker's orders, and afterwards to confirmation, without it. 
Multitudes of these live and die in the Church without ever 
having been baptized. And yet baptism is, in the order of 
time, and nature, and scripture, and their Church too, when 
they are theorizing upon it, admitted to be prior to the sacra- 
ment of the Supper, to which these unbaptized unbelievers 
are freely and constantly admitted ! 

" Such a policy tends directly to destroy the members, 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 363 

the officers, and the ordinances of the Church ; and thus to 
bring about a worse state of things than that which we have 
been told Wesley came to reform. The reformation needs 
reform, for it possesses all the evils of an established Church, 
without any of its advantages, and many facilities and 
incentives to evil which the Church of England effectually 
guarded against. It is so constructed and conducted, that 
popularity (that after which it so ardently pants) will speedi- 
ly prove its ruin, unless it heed the admonition of the 
Saviour, ' Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither 
cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them 
under their feet, and turn again and rend you.' 

" 3. This practice is productive of immense evil to all those 
churches which receive to their communion those only who 
make a credible profession of religion. This evil manifests 
itself in three ways. 

"1. It deprives them to a great extent of the power of doing 
good to that very large class of sinners who are, or have been, 
seekers in these churches. In general, such persons act to- 
wards all other Christians and ministers as if they felt that 
they had no right to preach the gospel to them. We have 
frequently witnessed this, even in the case of those who 
have received their convictions among others, and who have, 
up to the time of their becoming seekers in a Methodist 
Church, been perfectly accessible by them. The very minis- 
ters who had been the means of their conviction, no longer 
possessed the power of doing them good. Knowing that 
the seeker system was condemned by them, and probably 
feeling guilty for having suffered themselves to be drawn 
into it, they shy off, and consort with those who give them 
encouragement and comfort in their self-righteous scheme 
of salvation. They act as if their bargain with the Method- 
ists, like a bill of injunction, forbade all process against them 



o64 THE GKEAT IRON WHEEL. 

by others, until time shall have dissolved it. When this 
happens, they are confirmed, either with or without religion, 
as the case may be, and are farther removed from extrane- 
ous influence than ever ; or have turned back to where they 
were, with the feeling, that if they ever should be any thing, 
they mean to be Methodists. The credit system pleases 
the sinner. Still more is he delighted with the idea, that if, 
at the end of his indulgence, he should prove a moral bank- 
rupt, it would be no obstacle to a further and greater indul- 
gence. 

" 2. It exerts an indirect and deleterious influence upon 
other churches — causing them sometimes to be too hasty in 
receiving members to their communion. It would be strange 
if this were not the fact. Their work has been so often 
snatched from their hands before they were perfectly satisfied 
with it, that they have been compelled, in very self-defence, 
to fasten it sooner than they otherwise would have done. 
If in this they have erred, the guilt must lie principally upon 
those who have forced them to it. I say principally, for it 
is not right to do evil that good may come. 

" 3. It greatly hinders free and profitable communion be- 
tween the Methodists and those of us who preach intercom- 
munion. When we invite them to commune with us, we are 
compelled, by our principles and consciences, to debar from 
our table all who do not believe that they have met with a 
change of heart, whether in the Church or out of it, whether 
seekers or Church-confirmed sinners. This mortifies, and 
probably nettles, the professing part of these churches, and 
generally keeps them away from communion. This in turn 
mortifies us. And when they ask us, the case is little alter- 
ed. We know that the same characters that we refused a 
place at our table, will be with them at theirs, and we are 
in a strait to determine whether to go forward for the sake 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 365 

of the Christians, or to stay back for the sake of the sinners, 
that are made welcome there. And here is another mutual 
mortification, and probably recrimination, at a time when all 
ought to be concord and peace. 

" Permit me, in conclusion, to entreat my Methodist 
brethren, for the sake of sinners, for the sake of Christians, 
for the sake of the perpetuity and perfection of their own 
churches, for the comfort and prosperity of other churches, 
for the sake of Christ's honor, to put an end to this prac- 
tice." 






LETTER XXX. 



Inconsistencies — Admitting acknowledged sinners into the 
Church, and debarring for six months an acknowledged 
Christian from entering I — Giving baptism by force to non- 
believing children and unconscious infants, and refusing 
baptism to the prof essed Christian for six months! 

Dear Sir : — I respectfully ask by what authority are you 
warranted to invite and urge impenitent men and women to 
enter the Church to " get religion" — to seek salvation % If 
the Saviour has commanded it, all other denominations are 
involved in the sin of disobedience. If. it is the right and 
privilege of sinners, then are all other denominations denying 
to them their rights and privilege, and perhaps endangering 
their souls. Is there a passage, a verse, or the line of a 
verse, that gives you the shadow of a warrant 1 If" so, is 
it not your bound en duty to produce it, that Baptists and 
others may learn their duty ? Until you do this, I must, in 
common with all evangelical Christians, pronounce the prac- 
tice anti-scriptural, as i* is manifestly pernicious. It is one of 
the laws of the Conference — one of the traditions of the 
elders, making void the commandment of Christ. 

But by what authority do you presume to debar an ac- 
knowledged Christian (one whom your preachers declare 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 367 

was converted at the last " revival") from joining the Church 
for the space of six months 1 Is it not the privilege, the 
right, if not the duty, of a believer in Jesus Christ to con- 
fess him before men, and add himself to the Church the same 
day? Is not this the teaching of the New Testament? 
Does it anywhere require the believer to wait six months, 
six weeks, six days, or six hours 1 But does it not every- 
where command an immediate discharge of duty ? and do 
not all the examples of obedience show that it was rendered 
immediately on the part of believers ? "And they that glad- 
ly received the word were baptized, and the same day 
there were added unto them about three thousand souls." — 
(Acts ii.) By what authority, then, do you debar those who 
gladly receive the word among you from being added to the 
Church, for the space of six months ? Where do you find a war- 
rant for a practice in open war with the practice of the apostles? 
Where, but from the head of your Church — the congress of 
preachers ? I propound this question : Does not the right to 
shut a Christian out of the Church six months imply the right 
to shut him out six years, or sixty ? Will you say, " He is vir- 
tually in the Church when he joins the society ?" But he has 
never been baptized — he happened not to be sprinkled in in- 
fancy, and having made a consistent profession of conversion, 
one with which all your preachers are fully satisfied, he applies 
for baptism at your hands. Will you grant it to him the same 
day, or the same week, or in six weeks, or within six months ? 
No, sir; the law-book your preachers have solemnly vowed to 
follow positively forbids him the rite of baptism for the space 
of six months ! Have you any authority in God's word for 
this prohibition ? Does the last commission, the great law 
of baptism, place a trial period of six months, or six hours, 
between the exercise of faith in Christ and the profession of 
Christ in baptism ? Do not all the examples of baptism in 



368 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

the New Testament teach us that the converts were imme- 
diately baptized % How was it with the converts of Pente- 
cost % of Samaria 1 ? with the eunuch? Cornelius and his fam- 
ily ] with the jailor ? and with Lydia ? Were they not all 
baptized immediately upon their acceptance of Christ % By 
what authority, then, Mr. Soule, are you warranted in com- 
manding your ministers not to baptize a believer for six 
months ? Is not your practice manifestly contrary to that 
of the apostles % And by what authority do you drive in 
the face of their teachings and practice 1 By the authority 
of the Methodist congress — the preachers. If you and your 
ministers have a right to deny baptism to a believer for half 
a year, have you not the right to deny it to him for half a 
century, and altogether % Christ commands immediate obe- 
dience. You slip in between the believer and Christ, and 
say, " Not so ; you ought and shall wait six months, and not 
then shall you be allowed to obey Christ in the rite of bap- 
tism, unless you satisfy my class-leader and preacher that 
you believe the Discipline, and will obey us Methodist preach- 
ers. You must obey us for six months, as a proof that you 
will evermore obey us, before we will allow you to be bap- 
tized. You must first acknowledge our authority over you, 
by observing one of our laws — attend class- meetings week- 
ly for six months, and then you may be baptized and admit- 
ted into the Church ! ! " Do you not require of the convert 
open disobedience to Christ for six months, that he may give 
you satisfactory assurances of his willingness to obey you 
— -obey you in preference to Christ, and your laws to Christ's 
laws, and your book to Christ's Book ? And yet you will 
baptize the unconscious infant at once, living^ or dying! 
You have the same authority for the one practice that you 
have for the other. A scriptural precept or example for re- 
fusing to baptize and receive into your Church a Christian for 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSEp. 

the space of six months, and for baptizing and receiving into 
your Church an unconscious babe, you will find in the same 
chapter and verse of God's word. 

But I weigh one unanswerable objection against your 
practice of giving the Lord's Supper to the unregenerate and 
unbaptized seeker. 

You invert the order of the divine law, which requires faith 
before baptism, and baptism before the Supper. 

Calling upon a seeker, a confessedly unregenerate man, to 
partake of the Supper before his conversion and before his 
baptism, you violate and array yourself against the positive 
commands of Christ. To invert the divine order is to violate 
it. Christ places faith as a condition to baptism in every 
instance, for so reads his law, and there are no exceptions, 
and he makes baptism an indispensable condition to the 
observance of the Supper. No man can invert this order 
without a palpable violation of Christ's command, and a sub- 
version of the whole Christian system. 

Your own Hibbard has written forcibly upon this point : — 

" But why may we not suppose, also, that the same order 
of duty is now binding on every adult candidate for baptism ? 
Is not baptism binding upon us, as the next duty in order 
after conversion, as much as it was upon Cornelius, or the 
converts on the day of Pentecost'? Suppose Cornelius had 
withstood Peter on the question of the order of baptism. 
Suppose he had desired Peter to defer baptism till after he 
had communed at the Lord's table, or to some indefinite 
period. Would he not, in this instance, have arrayed him- 
self against a positive command of God % The command 
was, to be baptized. This was enjoined as the next act of 
religious duty after conversion. The time and relative order 
of the institution were points of palpable and direct obliga- 
tion, as well as the ordinance itself in the abstract ; and to 
16* 



870 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

invert this order, or defer baptism, would have been to 
oppose the divine arrangement." 

But Mr. Hibbard strangely forgets that in advocating 
infant baptism he inverts the divine order, and thus arrays 
himself against Heaven's arrangement ! When he can 
prove that baptism can in any instance, consonant with the 
teachings of the commission and the example of Christ or 
his apostles, precede faith, then will I prove to him from 
that very scripture that persons may partake of the sacred 
Supper before they have been baptized. All Mr. H.'s rea- 
sonings militate powerfully against infant baptism. 

As this is an important subject, I lay before you an article 
from the pen of a writer who ranks second to none in the 
South. 

"PROBATION AMONG THE METHODISTS. 

" It is a notorious fact that the Methodists receive into their 
societies probationers or seekers. These seekers have a six 
months' membership, and at the close of six months, accord- 
ing to strict Methodist rule, if they have not found, they are 
cut off from the society to which they attached themselves. 
It sometimes happens, however, that persons remain for 
years among the Methodists as seekers. They are not cut 
off when the probation term expires, but are permitted to 
renew their probation or to continue seekers without any 
renewal of the privilege of probationship. Methodist seekers 
are a sort of anomalous class. It seems that they are not of 
the world altogether; and yet they are not recognized as 
worthy of full membership in the Methodist societies. It 
may be they are thought to occupy a position, somewhere 
about half-way between the world and the Church. Pooi» 
creatures ! If this be so, analogical reasoning might suggest 
the idea of a place equi-distant between heaven and hell for 
seekers to go to when they die. Methodists, however, do 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 371 

not believe in purgatory. These are some of the notions 
of the grandmother which the granddaughter does not adopt. 
This is well enough. 

" The capital objection to the system of ' seekership' among 
Methodists is, that it is unscriptural. I am aware that some 
contend that it has the sanction of scripture. I once heard 
a Methodist preacher say, ' The expression, " This man re- 
ceiveth sinners and eateth with them," justified the reception 
of sinners into the Church, provided they were determined 
to seek the salvation of their souls !' What an expositor ! 
Whether his remarkable talent for exposition has been so 
highly appreciated by his brethren as to secure for him the 
title, Doctor of Divinity, I know not ; but I have observed 

in a Methodist paper that he is styled Dr. . Well, 

be it so. The public are beginning to learn that among 
Methodists the title D. D. is no indication of more than 
moderate attainments in literature or theology. But to the 
passage, 'This man receiveth sinners and eateth with them.' 
The Scribes and Pharisees disdained an association with pub- 
licans and sinners. They felt a supercilious contempt for 
such persons. When the Saviour came, he preached the 
gospel to the poor. He even associated with publicans and 
sinners that he might do them good. He reclined with them 
at their meals and ate with them, thus making the friendship 
symbolized by ' breaking bread together' subservient to the 
promotion of their spiritual welfare. But the man who will 
say that the social intercourse that Jesus had with sinners 
authorizes the reception of sinners into the .Church is not to 
be reasoned with. A sensible physician would prescribe' for 
him the application of ice-water to his feverish brain. 

" I have also heard the opinion expressed by a Methodist 
preacher that a portion of the three thousand that were added 
to the Church on the dav of Pentecost were seekers. He 



372 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

said he did ' not suppose they were all converted.' Why he 
did not suppose, he did not say. He seemed to speak with 
authority, and I suppose did not think it worth while to trou- 
ble himself with the little matters that are sometimes called 
reasons. What an age of nonsense we live in ! That man 
is not under the canopy of heaven, who, with the aid of a 
microscope, can see in the Pentecostal narrative any thing 
that resembles Methodist seekership. What are the facts in 
the case 1 Peter preached to the people — charged on them 
the murder of the Messiah — and showed the fulfillment of 
prophecy in his death and resurrection. Not stopping to 
harmonize the divine sovereignty with human agency, he pro- 
claimed both doctrines, letting the people know that they had 
wickedly done what had taken place ' by the determinate 
counsel and foreknowledge of God.' What was the effect 
of this sermon ? The people ' were pricked in their heart.' 
They were convicted. They felt deep compunction of con- 
science. They inquired, ' What shall we do V Peter said, 
4 Repent, and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of 
Jesus Christ for the remission of sins,' &c. 

"Conviction and compunction are not repentance. Hence 
Peter commanded the convicted to repent, &c. And who 
were baptized ? ' They that gladly received his word.' 
Peter preached the gospel. The people received his word 
— that is, they believed it. They received it gladly — the 
belief of it inspired their souls with joy. Those receiving 
the word thus were baptized. Do Methodist seekers receive 
the word of God gladly % Certainly not ; for if they did 
they .would, in a technical sense, be seekers no longer. A 
glad reception of the word would imply that they had found 
what they sought. There surely was in the Pentecostal 
additions to the Church no class of persons bearing even a 
remote resemblance to Methodist seekers. And thus the 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 873 

apostolic practice on the very day when the influences of the 
Holy Spirit were so richly enjoyed, affords not a shadow of 
justification to the Methodist practice. 

"A majority of the Methodists, I imagine, do not insist that 
there is any Scripture which sanctions their system of seek- 
ership ; but they assume the position that there is nothing in 
the word of God that condemns it. This principle may 
be very mischievous in its operation. It is, however, a 
principle of Methodism, as will be seen from the following 
extract from the 22d of the Articles of Religion, as published 
in the Discipline : 

" ' Whosoever, through his private judgment, willingly and 
purposely doth openly break the rites and ceremonies of the 
Church to which he belongs, which are not repugnant to the 
word of God, and are ordained and approved by common 
authority, ought to be rebuked openly, that others may fear 
to do the like, as one that offendeth against the common 
order of the Church, and woundeth the consciences of weak 
brethren. Every particular Church may ordain, change, or 
abolish rites and ceremonies, so that all things be done to 
edification.' 

" c Not repugnant to the word of God,' is a very convenient 
phrase for those who wish to do what the Scriptures do not 
enjoin. A Roman Catholic may say it is not repugnant to 
the word of God to baptize bells, sprinkle holy water, and 
do a thousand such things. Episcopalians may say it is not 
repugnant to the word of God to have archbishops, deans, 
prebendaries, &c. Methodists may say that though the 
word of God does not enjoin class-meetings, yet they are not 
repugnant to it, and therefore members who wilfully neglect 
them shall be excluded from the society. See Discipline of 
Church South, p. 93. Many persons seem to think that 
whatever is not expressly forbidden by the word of God is 



374 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

not repugnant to it. Is this a correct principle ? Let us see. 
Card playing, horse-racing, theatre-going, &c, are not ex- 
pressly forbidden by the word, but are they not repugnant 
to it ? The Bible does not, in so many words, forbid the 
manufacture of whisky, but is it not repugnant to the word 
of God to do so 1 

c; I think it will not do to apologize for Methodist seeker- 
ship by saying it is not forbidden by the word of God, and 
therefore it is not contrary to it. It may be repugnant to 
the Scriptures, though not expressly prohibited by them. 

" But I join issue with those who say that seekership among 
the Methodists is not repugnant to the word of God. I af- 
firm that it is. On me, then, is the burden of proof. No man 
acquainted with the New Testament will deny that the mem- 
bers of the apostolic churches are termed believers, disci- 
ples, new creatures, saints, &c. 

" Every one admitted to membership in one of the primi- 
tive churches made a credible profession of faith in Christ. 
Philip said to the Ethiopian. ' If thou believest with all thy 
heart thou mayest' be baptized. ' He answered and said, 
I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.' Paul speaks 
of 'the profession of faith.' 'Ye are all,' says he, 'the 
children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of 
you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.' 
Here, we have faith in Christ and the divinely appointed me- 
thod of professing that faith — viz., baptism. Are Methodist 
seekers believers'? They are not, most evidently. Who 
has not heard Methodist preachers and class-leaders, in times 
of religious excitement, urge inquirers (improperly called 
mourners) to believe in Christ. They cry vociferously, ; Be- 
lieve now, just now — nothing in the way but your unbelief 
— help, Lord. Amen.' Inquirers, then, Methodists them- 
selves being judges, are not believers. But notice. Before 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 375 

a camp-meeting or a protracted meeting closes, these in- 
quirers are urged to join the society as seekers. They are 
urged to do this on the supposition that they have not obeyed 
the command so loudly thundered into their ears — ' Believe, 
believe, believe.' Methodists, of course, believe that their 
society is a Church of Christ. In admitting seekers, there- 
fore, into it, they virtually and practically say that it is right 
to admit unbelievers to membership in the Church of Christ. 
Is not this repugnant to the word of God? It is as contrary 
to the word of God as darkness is to light. How can the 
Scriptures make faith in Christ indispensable to Church mem- 
bership, and at the same time sanction the membership of 
unbelievers ] If one man is required to do a particular thing 
because he believes, is another man required to do the same 
because he does not believe 1 This cannot be. And this 
view of the matter ought to banish Methodist seekership 
from the world. Seekers are not believers. Those who are 
recognized as believers are never urged to join the Church as 
seekers. The inevitable result, therefore, of seekership is to 
bring unbelievers into the Church. This looks like uniting 
Christ with Belial. Horrible ! It will be said that if seek- 
ers, do not believe they wish to believe. Suppose that to be 
the case. Why not wait till they do believe % And this re- 
minds me of what a rigid Calvinistic Presbyterian once said 
on his communion day. After inviting Christians to take 
their seats at the table, he said : ' I cannot invite Methodist 
seekers for these reasons : If God is willing to save them 
and they are not willing to be saved by him, they are rebels 
against him, and ought not to commune. If they say that 
they are willing to be saved according to the gospel plan, 
and God is not willing to save them, that sentiment is too 
Calvinistic for me ; and I cannot invite any who entertain it 
to this table.' 



376 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

" The members of apostolic churches were, as I have said, 
called ' disciples' — disciples of Christ. The term was used 
interchangeably with believers. Are seekers disciples 1 
Surely not. Disciples are those who learn of Christ. But 
those who learn of him first come to him. He says, ' Come 
unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden ; and I will 
give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, learn of me,' &c. 
Seekers have not come to Christ. If they had done so they 
would have found rest to their souls. How, then, can they 
be called disciples ? Disciples alone had a right to member- 
ship in the apostolic churches. As seekers are not disciples, 
and yet are admitted -into Methodist societies, it is as clear 
as the sun in mid-heaven that these societies are not formed 
after the model of those churches. 

' ; Again, the members of the New Testament churches were 
new creatures, born of God, born again, &c. Are seekers 
new creatures '\ Have old things passed away with them ? 
Have all things become new % Has that change occurred in 
them which so renovates the heart as to place its affections 
supremely on God ? It is useless to ask questions like these. 
Methodists themselves will admit that the new creature in 
Christ should fally enjoy the privileges of Church member- 
ship, and therefore should not be classed among seekers. 

" Once more. The members of apostolic churches were 
called saints. They had been delivered from the dominion 
of sin. Being made free from sin, they became the servants 
of God. Are seekers saints 1 Are they to be classed among 
the holy? The 'Discipline' says, 'There is only one con- 
dition previously required of those who desire admission in- 
to these societies, " a desire to flee from the wrath to come, 
and to be saved from their sins." ' A desire to flee from 
the wrath to come, the most wicked man may feel — and a 
desire to be saved from sin is a different thing from being 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 877 

saved from it. To desire to be saved is one thing — to be a 
saint is quite another thing. 

" I might go on and refer to other appellations given to 
the members of New Testament churches, showing that such 
appellations could not in truth be given to Methodist seek- 
ers ; but it is needless. I have shown already that it is repug- 
nant to the word of God to practise the system of seekership 
recognized among Methodists, because seekers are not be- 
lievers, disciples, new creatures, saints, &c, and therefore 
have no right to Church membership. There are many ob- 
jections to the unscriptural practice of which I am writing. 
If it were universal, where would be the distinction between 
believers and unbelievers ? Its tendency is to bring them all 
together, and in so doing to make the churches of Christ 
synagogues of Satan. It perverts a fundamental truth of 
the gospel. That truth is that the possession of God's grace 
in the soul is a qualification for Church membership. Seek- 
ers are induced to join the Methodists as a means of obtain- 
ing grace. They are to be baptized as a means of obtaining 
grace. They are to partake of the Lord's Supper as a means 
of obtaining grace. Thus, instead of having grace as a pre- 
paration for baptism and the Lord's Supper, they are to be 
baptized and commemorate the Saviour's death that they 
may get grace. Awful ! Those who do not love Christ 
partake of the emblems of his body and blood ! The seek- 
ership of the Methodists antagonizes with the fundamental 
principles of scriptural Church organization. May the day 
soon come when every thing so manifestly devised by man 
shall be repudiated, and Jesus Christ be not only theoreti- 
cally but practically acknowledged as the Head of the 
Church."* 

* Eld. J. M. Pendleton, Bowling Green, Ky. 



LETTER XXXI. 

The Class-meeting law — An essential feature of Methodism 
— Exclusion the penalty for its violation — Is confessedly a 
commandment of men — To submit to it is to obey and serve 
men — Band-meetings — Methodist confessionals — Their ten- 
dency. 

Dear Sir : — The law that enjoins weekly class-meetings, 
upon pain of excommunication, is a feature of Methodism to 
which I most seriously object, as manifestly unscriptural. 
It is not regarded as a small matter. It is not considered 
in the light of a mere recommendation, to promote holiness 
of heart or life, — to be heeded or not as the members may 
see fit ; but it is declared to be an essential feature of Meth- 
odism to promote the spirit of Methodism, and enforce 
obedience to the Discipline. 

The class-meeting law had its origin with a certain Captain 
Foy, in the year 1738, for the purpose of taking up a weekly 
collection from the members, as we have seen in Letter X. 
Wesley, pleased with its operation, enacted it as a positive 
and inviolable law of his societies, and made it an essential 
fart of his system. Methodist writers are pretty generally 
agreed that class-meetings are indispensable to the existence 
of Methodism, and yet are as free to admit that they are 
not of divine appointment. 

" Class-meetings are peculiar to Methodism. Other church- 
es have occasional inquiry, conference, or experience meet- 
ings. But class-meetings are an essential part of our 

(378) 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSE©. 379 

system. It is not claimed that this institution is of divine 
origin. So soon as we become willing to dispense with this 
feature of our system, our decline and downfall will certainly 
and rapidly follow. This is one of the ancient landmarks, 
and it would be almost sacrilegious to remove or deface it." — 
Methodism, by Inskip, pp. 192, 193. 

"It is not contended that this institution is of divine ap- 
pointment, or that, in the specific form which if obtains 
among Methodists, it had any existence in the primitive 
Church." — Charles Keys in Class-Leader's Manual, p. 19. 
This is published by the Methodist Book Concern. 

Coke and Asbury, in their notes on the Discipline, 
claimed that Captain Foy spake by inspiration of God ! 
They say, " But we must say, that those who entirely neglect 
this divinely -instituted ordinance — however various the names 
given to it, or the modes of conducting it, may be — manifest 
that they are either ashamed to acknowledge as their brethren 
the true children of God [are all who meet in class the true 
children of God?], or are the enemies of the cross of Christ." 

— (Quoted from " Class-meetings? by J. Miley, 200 Mul- 
berry street, N. Y.) " And yet," says Mr. Miley, " we regard 
our class-meetings simply as a prudential regulation. Mr. 
Wesley himself so regarded and styled them. They are a 
usage which our Church [i. e., clergy] has herself instituted." 

— Class-meetings, p. 73. 

Dr. N. Bond, when discussing with the Reformers, says : 
" But if the Reformers insist upon changing the rule which 
makes it obligatory upon our members to meet in class, 
because there is no positive scriptural command for it, they 
must also give up infant baptism, and the administration 
of the communion to females, for there is no such com- 
mandment FOR EITHER THE ONE OR THE OTHER." Economy 

of Methodism, p. 52. 



880 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

It is worthy of notice here, that Dr. Bond frankly declares 
that there is no command in the Bible for infant baptism, 
any more than for class-meetings; and if all practices not 
taught in God's word are to be given up, infant baptism, 
as well as class-meetings, must be abolished. All Christ- 
ians whose religion is the Bible, and the Bible only, as a 
perfect rule of practice as well as faith, will respond, u Then 
give it up ; away with the human dogmas, and purge the 
Church of the traditions of men. Jesus only is our Law- 
giver." 

We are grieved that a man of common intelligence, and a 
professed Christian teacher, should say that there is no scrip- 
tural command for female communion! Could a man make 
a declaration that would be better calculated to excite sus- 
picion as to his motive — his Christian honesty— and thereby 
injure himself with all candid readers? He might as well 
say there is no scriptural command for female repentance. 
Where did Christ or his apostles specifically call upon fe- 
males to repent? He might as consistently say that there 
is no Ci scriptural command " for female baptism. 

Are females accountable beings? Are they sinners? 
Then they are commanded to believe. Are they believers ? 
Then they are commanded to be baptized, and as baptized 
believers to observe all things whatsoever Christ taught his 
disciples to observe. And did he not command the observ- 
ance of the Lord's Supper ? Females find their command to 
participate in the celebration of the Supper, where its observ- 
ance is enjoined upon baptized believers — wherever it is made 
the duty of the Church of Christ to celebrate the Supper. 

I have clearly shown that the class-meeting law is, 1st, 
An essential feature, or element, in the Methodist system — 
the lungs, in which the blood of the system is prepared and 
vitalized — the heart that sends out the life-blood to every 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 381 

part, and warms the whole (?). That it is confessedly a human 
law — of purely man's commandment. It now remains to 
be shown that it is made equal in sanctity, if not superior, to 
any commandment of Christ ; for, by the command of the 
preachers, the most pious Christian in the Methodist 
" Church " must be excluded, if he, upon conscientious prin- 
ciples, refuses to attend the class-meeting, and be examined 
by, and confess his sins to, a class-leader, even though he 
may have no confidence in the piety of that class-leader. 
That Christian's life may be blameless, spotless ; he may be 
living in obedience to all the commands of the Saviour, but k 
still, if he refuses to attend the class, and undergo the pre- 
scribed examination, and make confession, the Discipline 
commands his expulsion and its consequent disgrace. It 
commands his expulsion, even though it authorizes the 
preacher in charge to give him a certificate that he has not 
even been guilty of the least immorality in disobeying this 
essential law of Methodism. 

Here is the law touching the case. — See Discipline, p. II, 
ch. V. § 3. Ques. 3. 

Think how such a certificate would read % 

" To all whom it may concern : — This is to certify that 
the bearer, Mr. A., has been excluded from the Methodist 
Episcopal Church South, for refusing to attend the weekly 
class-meeting, and pass examination, and make due confes- 
sions, according to the law imposed upon the M. E. Church 
by our preachers, whose right it is to govern us in all things 
according to their sovereign wills and pleasures. In behalf 
of Mr. A. we state that he refuses to submit to this law 
from conscientious motives that are honorable to himself, 
considering it a human commandment and tradition of men. 
He feels that, by submission to this law, he would be ac- 
knowledging the authority and sovereign jurisdiction of 



382 THE GJiJSAT IKON WHEEL. 

human lawgivers in the Church of Christ, whion is contrary 
to Christ's commandment. Finally, let it not be understood 
that we consider that the least impiety or immorality attaches 
to Mr. A. for thus repudiating and refusing obedience to the 
above law ; for we take pleasure in bearing our testimony 
to the devoted and consistent piety of Mr. A., and his per- 
severing attachment to, and observance of, the command- 
ments of Jesus Christ, and for this very reason 'he is a 
good enough Christian, but unfit to be a Methodist.' 

" Inskip, Clk. (Duly signed), " Joshua Soule. 

" T. E. Bond." 

Allow me to submit a few questions for your considera- 
tion: 

1. Can a Methodist say, with any color of truth, that the 
Bible, and the Bible alone, is his religion 1 Is the Bible his 
only rule of faith and practice, as it is of all evangelical 
Christians 1 

2. Must he not honor and observe the laws which the 
preachers make from Conference to Conference, equally 
with those commanded by Christ? 

3. Do you not make attendance upon class-meetings of 
more importance than attending upon the ministrations of the 
sanctuary 1 

Do you not make the observance of the class-meeting law 
the evidence of repentance, or of a sinner's working out his 
own salvation % What possible connection is there between 
evangelical repentance, or even a desire to flee from the 
wrath to come, and obeying a human tradition % He is not 
obeying God in attending class-meeting, for you admit he 
does not sin against God in refusing to attend class. 

But the Class-meeting law is made the test of qualifica- 
tion for Methodist Church membership. 

No one is allowed to become a full member of the " Meth- 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 38S 

odist Episcopal Church " until he has obeyed this law for 
full six months ! 

" How shall we prevent improper persons from insinuat- 
ing themselves into the Church? Ans. 1. Give tickets [for 
admission] to none, until they are recommended by a leader, 

WITH WHOM THEY HAVE MET IN CLASS AT LEAST SIX MONTHS." 

Here we see, by the way, how the members are at- 
tached to the wheels (i. e., class-leaders) that drive them. 
They must meet with him in class for six months, and 
secure his approbation by their constancy and contributions, 
since it is upon his recommendation that they are to be ad- 
mitted to full membership in the " Church." 

We see also, that, according to the Discipline, whatever 
the qualifications of an applicant may be, he is refused 
admission into the Church of Jesus Christ (if the Methodist 
Episcopal Church be a Church of Christ), until he or she has 
attended a Methodist class-meeting for six months ! ! ! 

If you have the authority to impose such an arbitrary in- 
stitution as the class-meeting, and exclude all who refuse to 
submit to it, have you not the right to institute a "confes- 
sional," as the Pope has done, and command all your follow- 
ers, men and women, to confess their sins of deed, and of 
thought, and imagination ? 



LETTER XXXII. 



Band-meetings — Virtually confessionals — Sinful thoughts 
must be confessed to the Preacher — Their tendency — The 
opinions of Presbyterians. 

Dear Sir : — I closed my last letter with the question, 
"Have you not instituted an ordinance similar to the Romish 
confessional ?" The perfect submission of your members 
to the clergy requires such an institution. 

What are your weekly " band-meetings" but weekly con- 
fessionals, where not only overt sins, but sins of thought and 
the imagination, are to be conscientiously confessed? 

Here is the law and directions in full : — 

Section IV. — Of the Band Societies. 

" Two, three, or four true believers, who have confidence in 
each other, form a band. Only it is to be observed, that 
in one of these bands all must be men, or all women ; 
and all married, or all unmarried. 

[Rules of the Band Societies, drawn up Dec. 25, 1738.] 

" The design of our meeting is to obey that command of 
God, Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for 
another, that ye may be healed. James v. 16. 

" To this end we agree, 

" 1. To meet once a week, at least. 

w 2. To come punctually at the hour appointed, without 
some extraordinary reason prevents. 

(8S4) 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 885 

" 3. To begin exactly at the hour with singing or prayer. 

" 4. To speak, each of us in order, freely and plainly, the 
true state of our souls, \rilh the faults we have committed 
in tempers, words, or actions, and the temptations ice hove 
felt, since our last meeting. 

" 5. To end every meeting with prayer suited to the state 
of each person present. 

" 6. To desire some person among us to speak his own 
state first, and then to ask the rest in order as many and as 
searching questions as may be, concerning their state, sins, 
and temptations. 

"Some of the questions proposed to one before he is ad- 
mitted among us may be to this effect : 

" 1. Have you the forgiveness of your sins? 

"2. Have you peace with God, through our Lord Jesus 
Christ 1 

" 3. Have you the witness of God's spirit with your spirit, 
that you are a child of God 1 

" 4. Is the love of God shed abroad in your heart '? 

" 5. Has no sin, inward or outward, dominion over you 1 

" 6. Do you desire to be told of your faults 1 

" 7. Do you desire to be told of all your faults, and that 
plain and home ? 

" 8. Do you desire that every one of us should tell you, 
from time to time, whatsoever is in our heart concerning 
you? 

" 9. Consider ! Do you desire we should tell you what- 
soever we think, whatsoever we fear, whatsoever we hear, 
concerning you ? 

"10. Do you desire that in doing this, we should come as 
close as possible, that we should cut to the quick, and search 
your heart to the bottom % 

" 11, Is it your desire and design to be ct. this and all 

17 



386 THE GKEAT IROtf WHEEL. 

other occasions entirely open, so as to speak without disguise, 
and without reserve % 

" Any of the preceding questions may be asked as often 
as occasion requires ; the four following at every meeting : 

" 1. What known sins have you committed since our last 
meeting ? 

" 2. What particular temptations have you met with % 

" 3. How were you delivered % 

" 4. What have you thought, said, or done, of which you 
doubt whether it be sin or not V 

That this is to all intents and purposes a confessional, none 
can deny. 

It is worthy of note that the very scripture, and the only 
scripture that the Pope urges in support of auricular confes- 
sion, Mr. Wesley brings forward to warrant the band-meet- 
ing confession ! It has no possible application to such con- 
fessions. If I have offended my brother, it is my duty to 
confess my fault to him, and if he has offended me, it is his 
duty to confess his faults to me, but Christ never made it my 
duty to confess to A. the offences I have committed against B., 
nor to any mortal, the sins of my thoughts and imagination, 
and resisted temptations. These I am to lay before God, 
and from him seek forgiveness and cleansing, and grace for 
future trials. 

The objection I have to the Methodist confessional above 
the Romish is this : — 

In the former I am required to confess all my sins of deed 
or thoughts as particularly and rigidly as Rome requires, to 
a preacher and three or four others, who are not forbidden 
to rehearse my confession throughout the whole community \ 
Then, in return, my thoughts and imagination are to be 
freighted with the sins and evil imaginations which other- 
wise I may have never thought of, and which may give rise i 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 887 

:o wicked thoughts and imagining which I will have to con- 
fess at the next band-meeting; for evil communications cor- 
rupt good manners. But in the confession instituted by 
Rome, the solitary penitent confesses to a solitary priest, 
vho is solemnly sworn never to reveal what is told in the 
confessional. No mortal ear but his own hears what is con- 
essed, and he is to give counsel and grant absolution upon 
ihe satisfactory evidence of repentance. 

The Discipline requires as fall a confession as the Missal 
loes, and requires a confession of that which it implies is 
mproper for men to confess before women, or even married 
nen to utter in the presence of the unmarried — and from 
females the confession of deeds and thoughts highly 
mproper for men to hear. If not, why must the bands be 
:omposed either of all married persons, or all unmarried — 
>f all men or of all women % 

But what are they required to confess 1 

1. " What known sins have you committed" &c? 

2. "What particular temptations have you met with]" 
^o specifications — the temptations presented to thought, 
hough mastered and indignantly banished, must be told. If 
,ny doubt let them read the last question : "What have you 
bought" yes, even thought, " said, or done, of which you 
loubt whether it be sin or not V I am not only required to 
onfess what I have said, or done, or thought, which I know 
o be sinful, but what I have thought, even if 1 am in doubt 
whether it be sinful ! 

Another thing remarkable about this band-meeting con- 
sssion is, that the preacher in charge, even if an unmarried 
nan, is authorized to hear confessions of this character from 
>oth the married and unmarried sisters of his charge! 
Vhat if some of their stray thoughts had been concerning 
imself ! 



388 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

If I mistake, I am misled by the following duty, prescribed 
to the preacher on charge: "(3.) As preachers, have you 
thoroughly considered your duty [*. e., as prescribed in 
the Discipline]'? And do you make a conscience of execut- 
ing every part of it 1 Do you meet every society 1 Also, 
the leaders and bands?" 

It is his duty, then, to meet the bands. He is father con- 
fessor to them. It does not make it his duty to confess 
his sins and sinful thoughts in the bands ; if so, in what ones, 
those of the men or of the women 1 ? It is silent. 

What husband would wish his wife subjected to such an 
examination as that prescribed in this confession, and what 
she may have done and thought one week, made the theme 
of neighborhood gossip the next 1 

What father would wish his daughter thus catechised by a 
Methodist circuit-rider, or by any one else ; or care to have 
her head made the receptacle of all the wicked acts, thoughts, 
and imaginations of a whole band ? As at the Romish con- 
fessional the thoughts and hearts of her votaries are cor- 
rupted, so nothing could well be better designed than this 
band-meeting to corrupt the mind and the heart of the young 
and old, and fill a neighborhood with gossip and scandal. 

I have been told that there are few communities in Ten- 
nessee that will permit the institution of this Methodist con- 
fessional — and to the honor of the State be it said. The 
most awful state of things have been brought about in a 
town or neighborhood by the confessions made in the band- 
meetings. 

I submit to your consideration the views entertained of 
your bands, and of their tendency, by Presbyterians. They 
are severe, but let the Christian w T orld judge of their just- 
ness: — 

" This is the great delusion Rome has practised. She 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 889 

gives the soul relief from the burden of sin by naked confes- 
sion, and that, not to God, but to and through some other 
being. Rome, we know, requires in its discipline, sorrow of 
heart from its penitents — but this amounts to nothing in the 
practical working of Popery. Relief from the burden of sin 
upon mere confession to a priest, is felt by all under her 
mighty mystery of iniquity. The effect of this delusion of 
Rome is two-fold. 

"1. It hardens the conscience, and leads to all sin. Con- 
fession to God, with sorrow, softens the heart, makes it 
meek and lowiy, and turns it from sin. Confession, even 
to God, without contrition, hardens the heart. The true 
Christian himself is even in danger of incurring this guilt, 
and experiencing this injury. But when the confession is 
made to the priest, the hardening process is ever going on. 
The very fact of telling sins against God to man gradu- 
ally obliterates the sense of guilt, extinguishes remorse, and, 
leaves the soul prepared to draw iniquity with cords of vanity, 
and sin as it ivere with a cart-rope. This is the history of 
the heart as it has developed itself everywhere, and at all 
times, under the Romish confessional. 

"2. The Romish confessional makes the mind submis- 
sive to priestly control. This follows as a matter of course. 
Once bring a man to believe that his eternal welfare depends 
upon the confessional — and that that confessional is under 
the control of a priesthood — and there is nothing to which 
that man will not submit in the orderings of that priesthood. 
We need not enlarge upon this position. Of all despotisms, 
that of Rome over the body and the soul has been, and is, 
the most perfect and terrible." 

Here the writer refers to the Rules for band-meetings, and 
adds, — 

" Now we affirm, that here we have the Roman Catholio 



390 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

confessional in bud and flower, if not as yet in its perfect 
fruit. Just examine the working of this class-meeting sys- 
tem. The class-leader [who is the mere tool of the travel- 
ling preacher] must see each person in his class once a iveek at 
least — to advise, reprove, comfort, exhort — carefully to in- 
quire how every soul in his class prospers — not only how each 
2)erson observes the outward rules, but how he grows in the 
knowledge and love of God. Again, while the class-leader is 
obliged to see each person in his class once a week at least, 
the members of the Church are under the same obligation to 
meet the class-leader — with the penalty hanging over 

THEM OF EXCLUSION FROM THE CHURCH IF THEY NO NOT. ' The 

class-leader may meet the members in private, or in the 
class. — [Mr. Wesley's works, vol. 5, p. 187.] He may ask 
them any questions he pleases touching their religious state. 
Again, the class-leader may be one of any band-meeting, of 
single men or married, as the case may be ; and being the 
class-leader, he would naturally and obviously be the leader 
of the band, as the band is only a more secret class. — In 
that band he must ask, and each member has bound himself 
or herself beforehand, to answer, such questions as these : 1. 
What known sins have you committed since our last meeting? 
2. What particular temptations have you met ivith? 3. 
How were you delivered? 4. What have you thought, said, 
or done, of which you doubt whether it be sin or not ? Look 
there ! These questions do cover the whole ground occupied 
by the Romish confessional. There is, absolutely, no ques- 
tion, BY POSSIBILITY, WHICH A ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST MAY 
ASK, BUT MAY BE ASKED BY THE BAND-LEADER ! ! No, not 

one. The vilest questions to be found in Dens' Theology, 
and which the priest is required to ask, may be put to every 
member of a band-meeting, and they have bound themselves 
to answer ! 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 391 

" Once more. The very fact that the class-meeting is sub- 
divided into bands of all men or all women, and all married 
or all single, and the pledges to make a clean breast exacted 
of all who enter these more secret class meetings, is proof 
positive that the most searching confession was sought to be 
had from every member. Yet again, let it be noticed : This 
class-leader, thus empowered to receive the confessions of 
so many members, as to their most secret thoughts, words> 
and actions, is also the person who is to ask these same 
members for their money for ' the relief of the preachers, 
Church, and poor ! ! ' How remarkable that confession in 
the Roman Catholic and Methodist churches should be connect- 
ed with the payment of money ! ! Lastly, in this connection, 
it is the duty of the class-leader to meet the minister [the 
travelling preacher] and the stewards of the society once a 
week, to inform the minister of any that are sick, or of 
any that walk disorderly and will not be reproved, and to 
pay the stewards what they have received of their several 
classes in the week preceding. 

" To complete this perfect drill of supervision and confes- 
sion, the travelling preacher in charge of the circuit appoints 
all the class-leaders, and changes them when he sees it neces- 
sary ; he sees that every band-leader have the rules of the 
band ; and he meets the men and women apart in the large 
societies, once a quarter, wherever it is practicable, &c. — 
[Dis. chap. 1, sec, 9.] From this summing up of the testi- 
mony in the case, it is plain that the Methodist Church, in its 
class-meeting system, does as distinctly require the confession 
of sins from its members, as that thing is required in the 
Roman Catholic Church. 

" This position will be yet more abundantly established, 
by considering the lame and impotent defence made by Mr. 
Wesley, when he was charged, again and again, with having 



392 THE GKEAT IRON WHEEL. 

introduced the Romish confessional into his class-meeting 
system. Mr. Wesley was one of the greatest cavillers that 
ever lived, and yet made the poorest out in dodging, when 
hard pressed and cross-questioned. He says, 'An objec- 
tion much more boldly and frequently urged, is that " all 
these bands are mere Popery." I hope I need not pass a 
harder censure on those [most of them at least] who affirm 
this, than that they talk of they know not what; they betray 
in themselves the most gross and shameful ignorance. Do 
they not yet know, that the only Popish confession is the 
confession made by a single person to a priest? And this 
itself is in no wise condemned by our Chvrch ; nay, she recom- 
mends it in some cases. Whereas, what we practise, is the 
confession of several persons, conjointly, not to a priest, but 
to each other. Consequently, it has no analogy at all to 
Popish confession. ' But the truth is, this is a stale objection, 
which many people make against any thing they do not like. 
It is all Popery out of hand.' — [Wesley's w T orks, vol. v. p. 
184.] 

" And this was the way Mr. Wesley shuffled out of the 
charge, made ' boldly and frequently,' by some of the first 
men in England, that ' all these bands toere mere Popery? 
It was thus he trifled with such men as Bishop Lavington of 
his own Church, and with Dr. Erskine of the Presbyterian 
Church of Scotland, both of whom held and charged on Mr. 
Wesley ' that the leader of a class acted like a Romish 
priest.'' 

"This reply of Mr. Wesley is a mere cavil. It is frivolous, 
fallacious, and foolish. The great delusion of Rome, we have 
shown, is, that she has erected some other throne than that of 
God. where confession is to be made. Now, as to the point 
before us, it does not make a jot of difference, whether thatj 
other throne- be the confessional of a Romish priest, or the 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 3^3 

class-meeting system of Mr. Wesley ; for, the same actual 
and perfect confession is demanded at both, and it does not 
make an iota of difference, as to the practical results upon 
character, except in degree of evil. 

" Here yet another question may be put to us : Whether 
Mr. Wesley gives any Scripture for his class-meeting con- 
fessional'? Oh, yes. He brings just one text from the Bible. 
And that text exactly the same one, and the only one brought 
by the Roman Catholic to sustain his priestly confessional ! ! 
— ' Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for 
another, that ye may be healed.' — [James v. 16.] The per- 
version of this text, when applied by Mr. Wesley to the 
class-meeting confessional, is as gross as when tortured by 
the Romanist to sustain his priestly confessional. The true 
meaning of the passage is happily expressed by Doddridge 
— ' When you are conscious of having .been really to blame, 
do not perversely vindicate a conduct which your own hearts 
condemn, but be frank in acknowledging it. Confess [your] 
faults one to another,' &c. &c. Here is the simple require- 
ment, to confess our faults one to another — under the dictate 
of conscience, in private, to the individual, and when, and 
where, in our view suitable. An obvious Christian duty! Now, 
what gross perversion of this scripture, to bring it to sanc- 
tion the Roman Catholic sacrament of penance, in which 
every member of that Church is required, under fearful 
sanctions, to come to a priest, so many times a year, and 
confess to him every thought, word and act of sin against 
God ! And we ask every man, if the perversion of the word 
of God by Mr. Wesley and Methodism, is not equally de- 
testable, when they, like the Catholic, bring this solitary text 
to vindicate the class-meeting system — in which every mem- 
ber of that Church is under obligation, upon pain of exclu- 
sion, to appear before the class-leader every week, and to 
17* 



394 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

submit f.o his careful inquiry how lie has observed the out- 
ward rules, and how he grows in the knowledge and love of 
God — in which every member may be separated from his 
wife or child in a band, where all are to be men or all 
women, all married or all unmarried — where, every week, 
they are pledged , by order of the Church, to confess every 
known sin committed since the last meeting. — to confess what 
particular temptations they have met tvith, — to confess how 
they were delivered, — to confess what they have thought, said, 
or done, of which they doubt whether it be sin or no. What 
an Outrage upon any honest interpretation of the Bible, to 
apply the text in James to the class-meeting confessional! 
But the class-meeting system is the Romish confessional in 
bud and blossom, and it was proper, therefore, for Mr. 
Wesley to pervert the same passage of Scripture brought by 
the priest, and just as the priest tortures it, to sanction the 
same system of iniquity. 

" Having thus, as we think, demonstrated the resemblance 
between the Roman and Methodist confessionals, in principle, 
we will now briefly notice two other points of resemblance, 
as results of the confessional, in a great degree, in both 
churches. 

' : 1. The conscience is hardened by it. Confession of sin to 
God, without contrition, hardens the conscience. Confession 
of siu, then, anywhere else than to God, must harden the 
conscience in a greater degree. Confession, therefore, in the 
Roman and Methodist systems must tend to a callous con- 
science. And it is so. Nine out of ten of the readers of 
this article will say, if they are not Methodists, ' Yes, it is 
true. We have often remarked a peculiar insensibility, as a 
characteristic of the Methodist common mass [whatever very 
many exceptions there certainly are from educational and 
refined associations in life] — a peculiar insensibility to moral 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 395 

honor and integrity of character.' 1 We have not dropped 
this sentence in hasty writing. We say deliberately — it is 
so — it is so — wide and deep— and we are not mistaken in 
saying our readers will respond, 'Afas! It is even so.' 
This is, in a great degree, the work of the class-meeting sys- 
tem of confessions. 

"2. The class-meeting system, like the Roman confes- 
sional, leads to submission to priestly control. We see, 
as the result of the latter, how, for a thousand years, the foot 
of the priest has been upon the neck of the submissive Catho- 
lic. This is the consummation of that stupendous system, 
concentrated in the confessional. It grants relief to the bur- 
dened soul at the confessional. Let man believe that, and he 
is a slave to that confessional. And we see, in the Methodist 
Church, with just the difference between the results of one 
hundred years of Methodism, and a thousand years of Ro- 
manism, the same thing. Let men and women go into the 
Methodist Church. Let them believe it is the will of God 
that they must meet a class-leader every week or be turned out 
of the Church. Let them believe he is authorized to inquire 
how every soul in his class prospers, and that they are 
bound by compulsion of Church wrath to tell how they have 
observed the outward rules of the Church, and how they 
have grown in the knowledge and love of God. Let them 
believe it is their duty to submit to be divided into bands 
of three or four ; that in one of these bands all must be 
men, or all women ; and all married, or all unmarried ; that 
they must meet in these bands every week and be bound to 
tell to one another, 1. Every known sin they have commit- 
ted since they last met, 2. What particular temptations 
they have met with. 3. How they were delivered. 4, 
What they have thought, said, or done, of which they 
doubted whether it was sin or not. Let them believe it is 



THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

also the will of God that they meet the preacher in charge 
once a quarter, if practicable, the men and women apart, 
and make other general confession to him. Let them be- 
lieve that the preacher will give tickets to none [to enter the 
Church] until they are recommended by a leader with whom 
they have met at least six moyiths on trial. Let them believe 
that this leader is the mere tool of that preacher, who is one 
of a great episcopacy, authorized by God to exert over them 
imperial dominion, and, in reference to whose authority, they 
have no t a word to say. Let men and women be in the 
Methodist Church, and believe this — and their minds are 
paralyzed and dumb. They are a deformed mass, with little 
better life than that breathed into it from the nostrils of the 
itinerancy. They are a Church stagnant as a pond, reflecting 
little else than that huge overshadowing cloud of despotism 
which frowns over it, and which must spread and shut out, 
at last, the light of heaven. 

"The submission of Methodists to their ministry is, even 
now, lamentable and astounding. They submit to their im- 
mense itinerancy being quartered upon them like an army of 
Foldiers, without any will of their own, whether they shall 
come, or stay, or go. They submit to be controlled in their 
reading, so that there is a virtual censorship of the press 
over them. They are drilled to prefer hearing some old 
hickupping driveler, who has '•got religion? to listening to 
Dr. Chalmers, if he is a Presbyterian. They submit to be 
controlled in the cut of their dress. They are drilled to ex- 
traordinary sameness in expression of face, and tone of voice. 
They are drilled to believe they verily do God service to be 
Methodists, whatever else they be — to uphold Methodism 
through thick and thin, right or wrong, precisely upon the 
principle on which political parties are sustained. For they are 
drilled to gather around the preacher in the pulpit, as around 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 397 

the demagogue on the stump, and hurrah over the merest 
bag of wind, as full answer to facts and arguments against 
Methodism. They are drilled to believe that it is right to 
hate with personal, private malignity, every man who speaks 
against Methodism, and to propagate against him any and 
every hearsay gabble that may create odium, as lawful de- 
fence of Methodism. Methodism is to be sustained — and 
the end sanctifies the means. This is the identical spirit of 
Rome. But, like causes must produce like effects. The 
Methodist ministry, in its class-meeting system, is Rome and 
its confessional, and, like priest like people. 

" We have promised to show the difference between the 
Roman and Methodist confessional. One point of difference 
will be sufficient for the present. The Romish confessional 
secures what is true, in a great degree — while the Method- 
ist confessional results in what is false, in a large measure. 
This can be made very plain. For, the Roman Catholic is 
not afraid to trust his priest almost to the fullest extent. 
The Methodist is afraid to trust his brotherhood to the same 
degree. The members of the band, it is true, are pledged to 
secrecy. [Wesley's works, vol. v. p. 185.] But, notwithstand- 
ing, Methodism cannot give to every one of innumerable bands, 
the secrecy cf the Roman confessional. It is, therefore, pre- 
posterous to think that any member of a class, even when he 
goes into the more secret band, will tell all his sins. He then 
necessarily gives a false pledge when he enters the band ; 
and his experience when there, is necessarily not true as to 
what he omits, if true as to what he actually reveals. The 
class-meeting system, then [although not so designed by 
Mr. Wesley], is, in fact, as perfect a school to learn people 
to tell what is not true as any thing ever devised by the 
Jesuits. 

" This will further appear as we now gU'e the •mm of the 
(svhole matter. 



398 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

''•(1.) The class-meeting system tends to make a Pharisee of 
the Christian. For, when the truly religious Methodist re- 
veals his experience every week, in which his progressive 
sanctiiication is disclosed to the class, his brethren, of course, 
must think well of him. And he must, notwithstanding his 
humility, think well of himself. Such a man will have little, 
peradventure, of sin in his own opinion to confess in the 
open class, if any in the more secret band. What next 1 
Why, he becomes more and more confirmed in good opi- 
nion of himself, as he reaches a higher sanctification every 
week ; while the brethren will be the more impressed by 
his humble look and honied relations of his triumphs over 
the flesh and Satan. What results from all this? Why, the 
man is macle a Pharisee. For. no man can tell every week 
in public class-meetings his supposed growth in grace, his 
joys and raptures, and see eyes swimming in exultation, and 
gazing upon him in fanatical or real religious sympathy — 
no man can pass through such secret, insidious, constant flat- 
tery, without spiritual pride. The poor man could not help 
being a Pharisee, even if his whole religious training did 
not tend that way. As it is, there is no help for him. Every 
body sees it, even as he walks along the street. There is an 
air about him not to be mistaken, as far as you recognize 
him. He has enlarged his borders, and made broad his 
spiritual phylacteries, even if he has laid aside the standing 
collar and rounded front. You see it as he smiles upon you, 
and talks with you by the way. As he reveals what he 
thinks of you, and what he thinks of himself, his heart speaks 
out — ' God, I thank thee I am not as other men.'' No ; the 
class-meeting never did, and never can, improve Christian 
character. It always has, and always will, injure the piety 
of the good man. The laws of human nature, however im- 
proved by grace, decide the question. And facts, every- 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 399 

where, in all the life of Methodism, sustain the opinion ex- 
pressed, as on a rock. 

" (2.) The results of the ©lass-meeting are, if possible, still 
worse upon the seeker and mere professor of religion. Both 
these grades are induced by the whole influence of Methodism 
to make a false religious experience. To say nothing here of 
its mischievous teachings upon the subject of the evidences of 
regeneration, Methodism encourages its members to look for 
high excitement — enthusiastic joy — fanatical delusions. And 
now, when the truly good man tells his real experience, col- 
ored as it may be by his creed and his fancy, these seekers 
and mere professors will desire to give as good an experience, 
too, as they can ; and, from the very fact that they have no 
religion, they will, in the workings of the deceitful heart, be 
led to tell what is false in self deception, even if they do not 
make a mock character for the occasion. Oh ! what facts would 
be disclosed if we had the history of the class-meetino- from 
the beginning ! Alas ! what will be the revelations of the 
last day ! 

"(3.) The class-meeting confessional, if enforced as Mr. Wes- 
ley planned it, and as it is in the Discipline, would make 
the Methodist Church the most hideous school for scandal in 
the world. Look at the thing ! Just let us suppose they 
have eight hundred thousand members. (They claim a great 
many more.) That gives two hundred thousand bands of 
four members each. So, we may say, for round count, fifty 
thousand bands of married men, fifty thousand bands of mar- 
ried women, fifty thousand bands of unmarried men, and as 
many of unmarried women! Two hundred thousand confes- 
sionals in active operation every Sabbath day, in which every 
married man in the Methodist Church would be telling to 
other married men all his sins and temptations, and all he 
had said, thought, or done, that was of doubtful morality ; 



400 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

and every married woman earnest at the same thing, and 
every young man and every girl ! Why, Satan himself never, 
even in Romanism, invented a system more certain to pro- 
duce a lax morality. Let people talk about sin habitually, 
especially secret thoughts and emotions, as a prescribed 
round of duty, whether at the Roman confessional, or in the 
Methodist class or band-meeting, or in aMcDowcl New York 
Moral Reform Association, or anywhere else, and you break 
down the natural barriers God has erected in the instinctive 
shame of human nature, to say nothing of quenching the 
Spirit. ' Sin lieth at the door,'' and under such invitation, 
must and will come in. 

"We repeat, what a school for scandal the Methodist Church 
would be, if the class-meeting system could be made perfect 
in its motion under the action of the Great Iron Wheel ! 

" Here we may remark, that the class-meeting was most 
complete in its operation under the control of Mr. Wesley 
himself. Yet, enthusiastic and fanatical as he was, he seems 
to have felt, without knowing the cause, the mischievous 
working of his system. lie remarks: 'The world say, the 
Methodists are no better than other people. This is not true. 
But it is nearer the truth than we are willing to believe. For 
personal religion, either towards God or man, is amazingly 
superficial among us. How little faith ! How little com- 
munion with God! How little brotherly love ! What con- 
tinual judging of one another ! What gossipping, evil-speak- 
ing, talebtaring ! W^hat want of mobal honesty ! To in- 
stance only one or tw T o particulars,- who does as he would 
be done by, in buying and selli .g, particularly in selling 
horses ? Write him a knave that does not. And the Meth- 
odist knave is the worst of all knaves. Family religion is 
shamefully wanting, and almost in every branch.' — Wesley's 
Works, vol. v. p. 213. 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 401 

"What a commentary is this upon Mr. Wesley's class- 
meeting system of weekly drill and confession of sins ! What 
a picture of Methodism ! And the picture drawn by Mr. 
Wesley himself! Shall any dare blame us if we say Mr. 
Wesley has drawn a true picture of Methodism? And we 
ask another question, — Can Methodism, in its results, ever 
exhibit any better picture than this drawn by Mr. Wesley 1 

" It is, then, the solemn duty of every lover of civil and 
religious liberty, to examine the Great Iron Wheel ; and the 
duty of every upright man and woman in the community 
to understand this class-meeting system, and say, ''Let it he 
done away? It is the Roman Catholic confessional. It leads 
men to confess and be relieved of their sins without coming 
to Christ. It hardens the conscience to moral obligations. 
It prostrates body and soul under the feet of an irresponsi- 
ble ministry. It injures the piety of the good man. It en- 
courages hypocrisy. It must, if fully developed, demoralize 
society. It is a disgrace to the day in which we live, and it 
is a burlesque and dishonor upon the word of God. Let it 
be done away. 

"We have given facts and arguments, and if any complain 
that we have also spoken in some ridicule and contempt of 
this foul thing, we reply, that we are not careful to make 
any apology. We hold with Pascal in what he says to the 
Jesuits, and we conclude with his words, which we address 
to Methodist preachers : ' Indeed, reverend sirs, there is a 
vast difference between laughing at religion, and laughing at 
those who profane it by their extravagant opinions. It were 
impiety to be wanting in respect for the verities which the 
Spirit of God has revealed : but it were no less impiety, of 
another sort, to be wanting in contempt for the falsities which 
the spirit of man opposes to them. Do not then expect, 
sirs, to make people believe i 4 - is unworthy of a Christian to 



402 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

treat error with derision. Nothing is easier than to convince 
all who were not aware of it before, that this practice is per- 
fectly just ; that it is common with the fathers of the Church ; 
and that it is sanctioned by the Scripture, by the example of 
the best of saints, and even by that of God himself. 1 " — Cal- 
vinistlc Magazine. 

You must also abolish these laws before I can recognize 
your societies as Churches of Christ. 



LETTER XXXIII 



The Proselyting features of Methodism — The Influence of the 
Class-leader — Aid, patronage, and suffrage offered to all 
who will either join or groan — A popish feature, <&c. — How 
Presbyterians regard it. 

"That no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the 
beast, or the number of Ms name. — Rev. xiii . 17. 

Dear Sir : — In introducing the subject of this letter, allow 
me to call your attention to an extract from an article 
which appeared in the New York Recorder, over the signa- 
ture of " Hyeros" : — 

" In a late number of the Christian Advocate and Journal, 
at the close of an article on the itinerancy, the following rea- 
sons are assigned why Methodists lose so many converts : 

" ' 1. Some were never converted. 

(i i 2. We are too afraid of proselyting our own converts. 
While we are standing back to let them go where they 
choose, our neighbors, down by the pond, are putting their 
arms around their necks, to drag them down under the 
water? 

" The author of the foregoing has advanced something 
which I do not recollect to have seen in print before, and I 
very cheerfully give him credit for an original discovery, 
though he may deserve little for either wisdom or verity. 
"He makes a reflection on the ministerial management of his 
brethren, which I think their course generally will not jus- 

(408) 



404 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

tify. So far as my knowledge extends, I have never seen 
any deficiency in proselyting skill, or any tardiness in prose- 
lyting effort. 

"The Methodist system is very comprehensive. Its ' so- 
cieties' are so framed as to admit not only converted persons, 
but all ' who desire to flee from the wrath to come, and to 
be saved from their sins.' — Methodist Discipline, p. 21, edi- 
tion of 184S. 

"The Methodists have their arms open to receive those 
who are utterly destitute of vital godliness; such persons 
may be added to their 'societies;' and of such their 'socie- 
ties' are, in part, constituted. Each 'society is no other than 
a company of men, having the form and seeking the -power of 
godliness ; united in order to pray together, to receive the 
word of exhortation, and to watch over one another in love, 
that they may help each other to work out their salvation.' 

" 'A company of men, having the form and seeling the power 
of godliness.' — (Discipline, p. 20.) What construction can 
be put upon this language, which will invalidate the proof 
it furnishes, that men destitute of true religion are embraced 
in the 'societies,' I have yet to learn; but with practical 
commentaries, in accordance with what appears obviously to 
be its meaning. I am sufficiently acquainted. ' Each society 
is divided into smaller companies, called classes,' consisting 
of ' about twelve persons,' ' one of whom is styled the lead- 
er. 1 — (Discipline, p. 20.) The leader is appointed by the 
minister, who has the ' charge of a circuit or station,' and 
holds his post merely at the will of his superior. His duties 
are accurately defined in the Discipline, pp. 20, 21, with a 
single exception, which, if added in the form following, would 
be a published law, which he coull not obey more to the 
very letter than he now does, in practice, in the absence of ,. 
any established rule. It is his duty, — w 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 405 

" III. In every practical way to increase the members 

OF HIS CLASS. 

" 1. He should visit every awakened person he can, and 
ask him if he will allow him to put his name on the ' class- 
paper,' telling him he can at any time withdraw from the 
class if he wishes. 

" 2. In times of revival, the leader should begin with the 
first professed convert, and very judiciously urge him to 
join the class, and so with all others, where it can be done 
without prejudice to the cause. 

" 3. He may make such representations of the doctrine and 
practice of other denominations as will „sour the minds of 
converts towards them. 

"4. He may urge disaffected members of other churches to 
join the class, for the sake of improving their spirituality, 
and facilitating their progress on the road to entire sancti- 
fication. 

" If these things look bad in print, it is certainly bad to do 
them. 

" This extra work is usually done as faithfully as any that 
is required under the two heads of duty given in the Dis- 
cipline. Facts will abundantly substantiate what is here 
said. 

" Among all evangelical denominations, I know of none 
whose ecclesiastical polity is so well calculated to engender 
a proselyting spirit, as that of the Methodists ; nor do I 
know of any whose ministers and members are greater 
adepts in the art of gaining adherents. By means of the 
class-paper, thousands have been drawn in among them, who 
were totally ignorant of every thing but their pretensions to 
superior piety and devotion. The praise of ? Methodism,' 
as 'a religion of love,' has been vociferated to the skies ; 
while its ecclesiastical affinities, its \ administrative rules,' 



406 THE GKEAT IRON WHEEL. 

its ' ritual,' and its ' temporal economy,' have been very 
cautiously and sparingly brought into view, as the minds 
of neophytes were able to bear it. Gradually the cords 
by which they were bound are strengthened, until at length 
they are held as with a cart-rope. 

I may go further, and say that, in some sections, not only 
will persons destitute of religion be received into the class, 
but Methodist ministers will urge them, after a limited period, 
to enter into ' full fellowship,' by joining the Church. Be 
it remembered, that uniting with the class is not joining ' the 
Church.' It is only going into the vestibule, or entry-way, 
while the doors of. the main building are closed. None can 
enter the temple until they have passed six months in • the 
court of the Gentiles.' They may be ' sprinkled, poured, or 
immersed,' at any time after joining the class ; and they are 
expected to 'attend upon all the ordinances of God,' among 
which is ' the Supper of the Lord.' They must come to the 
Lord's table for a number of months before they are fit for 
admission to the Church. 

" The Church, as they define it, is ' a congregation of faith- 
fulmen, in which the pure word of God is preached, and the 
sacraments duly administered, according to Christ's ordi- 
nance, in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the 
same.' — (13th of the Articles of Eeligion.) This is substan- 
tially the same as the 19th Article of the Church of England, 
from which it was borrowed ; with reference to which, Wes- 
ley says (sermon lxxix.), that in the Latin translation, pub- 
lished simultaneously with the English edition, 'the words 
were " Ccetus credentium," a congregation of believers ; plainly 
showing that by faithful men, the compilers meant men en- 
dued with living faith.' The Church, or congregation of 
believers, has no privileges, so far as I know, which are not 
enjoyed by the members of classes ; and it may be ques- 



CHRISTIANITY KEVISKSED. 407 

tioned whether the Church contains proportionately a less 
number of non-religious persons than the societies Yet 
according to the following provision, the doors of the 
Church won d seem to be guarded with extra caution and care. 
; UM» I. How shall wc prevent improper persons from 
insinuating themselves into the Church ? 

"'Ans. 1. Let none be received into the Church until they 
are recommended by a leader with whom they have met 
at ast six months on trial, and have been baptized • and 
shall, on examination of the minister in charge before the 
Church, g,ve sat.sfactory assurances both of the correctness 
of their fiuth and their willingness to observe and keep the 
rules of the Church.'-^^, p . 24 Sep the 

"This rule though it requires of applicants satisfactory as- 

fo.bd the rcceptmn of those who are strangers to expert 
-enta rehg.on, or else it is misinterpreted °by those wo 

nullified ; aswll appear by the following extract from the 
Christian Advocate and Journal of 1832 :— 

Cedar Creek Circuit, Sept. 5, 1832 
" 'At our last two days' meeting, a circumstance transpired 
wh h I cannot forbear to name. After preaching on the 
Sabbath I opened the door of the Church, for the reception 
of members; and after having observed that it was custom" 
ary w,th „s to admit penitents to membership, I remarked 
that however individuals might object to this practice, I had 
uigle doubt but that there were number; that 

n\r l T nr m ^4-~ „*i__ n i . 



& Ulctt in ere were numbers tW 

wouM thank God in eternity, for having been adm ted nto 
the Church previously to their having obtained religion 
land that I had witnessed instances of conversion while „ 
the act of joining the Church. « G w TEAg , 



408 THE GREAT IRON WHlfiEL. 

" Here we have the declaration of one of their own minis- 
ters, that it is customary with them to admit penitents to 
Church membership. Penitents, as I understand them to 
use the term, is applied to all persons who are sufficiently 
awakened to ' come forward to the altar' to be prayed for ; 
and, before they have ' obtained religion,' the door of the 
Church is open for their reception. By this common prac- 
tice, numbers have been ' admitted into the Church, previously 
to their having obtained religion.'' 

"This does not look like 'standing back to let converts 
go where they choose.' But, notwithstanding their early 
and indefatigable efforts, they lose many converts. This 
is very afflictive ; a pity, indeed, that they should fail to 
bring into their connection all who are professedly converted 
under Methodist ministrations. Spreading their net for all, 
it must be painful if any escape when it is sprung. Yet so 
it is. The world, or Satan, catches some of them ; but, 
worst of all, their neighbors — who are no better than they 
should be — have such an affection for their converts, that they 
seize them, bear them off to the pond, and ' drag them down 
under the water ! ' The monsters ! they ought to be inocu- 
lated for the hydrophobia forthwith ! They would then pro- 
bably not go near the pond. 

" ' We lose so many,' says Titus, ' because we are too 
afraid of proselyting our own converts.'' Credat Judseus 
Apella ! I cannot believe that their proselyting propensities 
are restrained by fear, or delicacy, or propriety ; neither do 
I believe that they lose many of their own converts ; nor that 
many of them make an intelligent choice as to what Church 
they will join. On the contrary, I believe that much effort 
is made to prejudice their minds against other denomina- 
tions." 

The system not only furnishes the effioient means of pro- 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 409 

selyting alluded to above, to augment its gross numbers, 
without regard to piety : 1. Infant baptism for the children 
of unbelievers as well as believers. By thus extending the 
bounds of infant baptism, Methodists can persuade the unre- 
generate parents that they are more liberal in this matter 
than Presbyterians and Episcopalians. These children will 
naturally have a kinder feeling towards Methodists than 
towards any other people, and be more likely to join them. 
2. The system of seekership is a powerful proselyting 
feature in Methodism. Thousands of wicked men, young 
and old, are induced to join the class as seekers ; Methodists 
are careful to teach them that they care more for their souls 
than other people, for see, they take them right into the 
Church, and allow them to partake of the Lord's Supper, 
as a means of regeneration. They succeed most generally 
in enlisting their prejudices in favor of the people called 
Methodists. These seekers, and thousands that have 
once been seekers, are ready to go for the Methodists, 
to talk, to swear, and to fight, if necessary, to advance 
" the cause." Who has not seen all this exemplified during 
religious discussions, in which a Methodist member was a 
party 1 

But the Discipline directly offers the patronage, suffrage, 
money of the Methodist E. Church to those who will become 
identified with it, or even groan so to be. 

This, to our mind, is a most monstrous feature, and most 
corrupting in its influence. To explain my meaning, I call 
your attention to the following rule : 

" It is expected of all who continue in these societies, that 
they shall continue to evidence their desire for salvation, 

" By doing good, especially to them that are of the house- 
hold of faith, or groaning so to be ; employing them prefera- 
bly to others ; buying of one another ; helping each other in 
18 



410 THE GBEAT IKON WHEEL. 

business ; and so much the more because the world will love 
its own, and them onlyT — Dis., part. I., ch. ii., sec. 1. 

What does the Discipline say to a money-loving world % 
" We Methodists are a numerous, powerful, and wealthy 
people, and all our patronage and support we pledge to 
those who will belong to our household of faith, or only 
groan so to do. To the laboring men, wealthy undertakers 
of works public or private, brick-masons, house-carpenters, 
&c, &c, say, if you will become a Methodist, we will em- 
ploy you — the Discipline requires us to employ Methodists 
in preference to others." A printer or a bookbinder goes to 
the Book Concern in Nashville, and asks for work, and the 
agent inquires, "Arc you a Methodist V " No, sir." " Do you 
not belong as a seeker — one groaning so to be V " No, sir." 
" Well," says the agent, ;i I cannot employ you then, so long 
as I can engage Methodists or groaners, for the Discipline re- 
quires me to employ Methodists in preference to others." Here 
is patronage offered for a bare profession. The Discipline says 
to mechanics and tradesmen, " The Methodists have money, 
and will buy of you, if you will simply join the class and 
advocate Methodism in the community. Give Methodists 
your influence, and they will give you their patronage." To 
the politician the Discipline virtually says, " We have the ma- 
jority of votes in your district, and we can make you a con- 
stable, a sheriff, a judge, a representative, or a senator. Do 
you go for Methodism, and Methodists will go for you." 

Will business men, who are sagacious in wa*ys and means 
to secure patronage, be slow in understanding this feature of 
the Discipline? They have no particular concern about 
religion, and no special preference for one denomination 
over another, and consequently can easily persuade them- 
selves that it might do no harm, and be w r ell enough on the 
whole, to allow their name to be placed upon the class-paper. 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 411 

The politician foresees that the canvass will be a very close 
one — that he will need every vote that can be procured. 
He hears the preacher read this among other duties to the 
society — to help each other in business/ His business is 
to gain this election, and if he only could get the help of 
one hundred Methodist votes, he would be safe. Is it 
strange that such thoughts should pass through his brain *? 
and would it be strange to find him, if not a member of the 
household, at least a groaner, three months before the elec- 
tion comes off? Alas ! there is good reason to believe that 
there are multiplied thousands of Methodists made annually 
by the operation of this bribe in the form of employment, 
help in business, patronage., and suffrage. Can we look for 
anything else, considering the depravity of the human heart, 
and the love of gain that is so prevalent? Look at the bald- 
ness of the proposition. The Methodist Church says to all 
professional men, tradesmen, politicians, and even day- 
laborers, " Come, and give to Methodism, to its doctrines 
and usages, support — to its ministers in the iniquitous prero- 
gatives they have assumed to exercise, your influence, and 
I will give to merchants, patronage — custom ; to doctors, 
practice; to politicians, votes ; and to day -laborers, work; in 
preference to all others." I say, is it strange that thousands 
annually accept the offer 1 

But look at it from another point. B. is a merchant, and 
has long been " groaning" in a Methodist society, — a nom- 
inal " seeker," and is enjoying a heavy Methodist patronage, 
"as it is stipulated in the bond." He has become fully dis- 
satisfied with his position in the Methodist Church — fully 
dissatisfied with the doctrines and preachings, and the ways 
and means of Methodism, which he^ is compelled to counte- 
nance, advocate and defend, owing to his connection with the 
society, or offend. He cannot conscientiously do so longer ; 



412 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. . 

but what is he to do? He is dependent upon Methodist 
patronage for the means with which to meet his notes for his 
present stock of goods — for the bread to feed his family. 
The principal part of his customers are Methodists, and 
should he leave the class — should he cease to groan, they will 
cease to trade — to help him in his business ; for so it is writ- 
ten in the bond. It is evident he must either fail in business, 
or play the hypocrite before God and men. 

But suppose, again, a young merchant with his first stock 
of goods, a " seeker" — has experienced the grace of God, 
and with his new heart, the eyes of his understanding having 
been enlightened, feels and sees that it is his duty to follow 
Christ, not only in immersion^ but in all things, calling no 
man master. He cannot, with a pure conscience, be bap- 
tized into the Discipline and into the jurisdiction of Method- 
ist preachers and bishops. What shall he do ? His brethren 
learn that he is filtering, and one of the old leaders, and 
his long-known personal friend, visits him. " You are not 
going to leave us to join the Baptists, are you, Bro. B. f 
" Well, I must confess I have some thoughts of it ; I wish 
to be immersed, by those who believe in it — by those au- 
thorized to administer it — and with an immersion into Jesus 
Christ alone, as my master, my King and Lawgiver, taking 
his word as the only rule of my faith and practice — not 
into the jurisdiction of men, though ministers and good 
men, and into obedience to a Book of Discipline." "But, 
brother B., do you not see what a rash act you are about to 
perform 1 You are a young man — a poor man. You have 
a large stock of goods on hand, and your notes are in bank, 
and must be met, or you are ruined for ever, it may be, as a 
merchant. Your customers are all Methodists — we have all 
been patronizing you to help you to build up a business, 
knowing that your influence and means would be of very 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 413 

great advantage to our cause in this town and county. Now, 
if you leave us and thus repudiate the doctrines of our 
Church, you will inevitably lose your custom, and you know 
what will be the result. Remain with us, and if you are 
determined to be immersed, why, we will immerse you." 

What is this young Christian to do ? I can tell you what 
he did do, for the above is a reality, not a fiction.* He 
mounted a horse the next Saturday morning, leaving the 
class, and the store, and friends, and almost acquaintances, 
and rode into the country some ten or fifteen miles, to a little 
Baptist Church that worshipped in a log house in the woods, 
and when the usual invitation was given to any who might 
wish to offer themselves to the Church, the merchant pre- 
sented himself, to the utter astonishment and delight of the 
little despised band of brethren. 

What the old leader first told came to pass, in part. His 
Methodist patrons left him, but his trust was in God, and He 
raised up friends and patrons. He met his notes, and his 
store is still open at the same place, and he himself has for 
years been preaching Jesus, as the sinner's only Saviour, and 
the Christian's only King. 

I leave the reader to think in how many ways, and in 
how many cases, this species of bribery and corruption may 
be applied. This is not an obsolete rule — it is intensely ope- 
rative to-day. Examine the columns of the Memphis Meth- 
odist Advocate for the past two years, and there see the 
doctrine boldly advocated in all its amplitude, and Method- 
ists openly called upon to patronize Methodist merchants, 
&c, because they were members* of the Methodist E. 
Church, or were "groaning so to be;" and the names of 
Methodist merchants were published ! Cannot the re ader see 

* If any one wishes the name of the young merchant, he can have 
his address, for he is still living (1835). 



414 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

how a young tradesman, lawyer, physician, or shoemaker, 
would be effectually starved into the Methodist Church, or 
starved out of any county or State, were all its citizens 
Methodists ? ! ! 

Is it a matter of surprise that all denominations are be- 
coming more and more clannish, and practising " close com- 
munion" in merchandising and trade ? In the workings of 
the above doctrine a solution can be found. The merchant 
who sells his conscience so cheaply, or who has none to sell, 
is unworthy of the confidence of the community, and to my 
mind, the above feature resembles strongly the mark, and 
partakes intimately of the spirit, of the " image of the beast." 
See Rev. xiii : " And he caused all, both small and great, rich 
and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand 
or in their foreheads ; and that no man might buy or sell, save 
he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number 
of his name." It sounds very much like he that belongeth to 
the household of the Methodist faith, or is groaning" so to be ! 

The popes of Rome have been wont to put the above 
law in force to expel, starve out from their dominion those 
Anabaptists whom they could not subdue with torture or the 
sword. 

" The Synod that met at Tours in the 12th century, passed 
a law which required all bishops and priests in the country of 
Toulouse, to take care and forbid, under pain of excommu- 
nication, every person from presuming to give receptions 
or the least assistance, to the followers of this [the Annabap- 
tist] heresy ! to have no dealings with them in buying and 
selling, that thus being deprived of the common necessaries 
of life, they might be compelled to repent of the evil of 
their way, and submit to the jurisdiction of the Church."* 



* See Orchard's History of Baptists in every century from A.D. 
33— A.D. 1800. Published by Graves and Marks, Nashville, Term. 



LETTER XXXIV 



BAPTISM. 

"One Lord, one Faith, one Baptism"— immersion. — Paux. 

Methodists have two distinct " baptisms" one for infants and 
one for adults — A distinct and different office for each — A 
distinct and altogether different design for each — The regen- 
eration of infants in baptism in all cases, plainly taught in 
the Discipline and standard works of the Booh Concern. 

Dear Sir : — The ordinance of Christian baptism, both as 
relating to the subject and the action, furnishes a fruitful 
source of discussion between Methodists and Baptists. I do 
not expect that this letter will put a full stop to such discus- 
sions, but I design in it to place the teachings of your Church 
— i. e., your clergy — in full and fair relief before my read- 
ers, and suggest the true issues for all future discussions. 

If I can understand your Discipline and your standard 
writers — and especially Wesley, whose teachings you cer- 
tainly will not deny — you recognize and practise tivo distinct 
baptisms, for two wholly different characters, and you teach 
that the design and efficacy of each baptism is different. 

You hold and teach one baptism for unconscious infants 
and non-believing children, and one for believing adults. The 
design and efficacy of each is wholly different. When ap- 
plied to infants and to children — and of what age you do not 
specify ; it may be from one hour to twenty years, for aught 

415) 



416 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

I can learn from the Discipline — you teach that baptism is 
for the washing away the guilt of original sin, and spiritual 
regeneration, and that all infants and children are actually 
cleansed from original sin, and regenerated in and by the act 
of baptism. 

That you consider infant baptism wholly different from 
adult baptism, needs no other proof than a reference to the 
fact that the Discipline provides a distinct and different ritual 
or ° order" for the baptism of infants ! 

If you regard it in all respects one and the same rite, why 
do you institute a " Ministration of Baptism to Infants," and 
a " Ministration of Baptism to such as are of riper years f 

The design of your baptism for both classes — from the 
very words put into the mouth of the minister — the 
prayers used both before and after the application of water — is 
evidently for the washing away of original sin, and the new 
birth or spiritual regeneration of the subject. I will, howev- 
er, admit the slight difference in the case of adults upon Mr. 
Wesley's authority. 

I here submit the whole ritual for each baptism, and call 
your candid attention, and the attention of the reader, to the 
peculiar phraseology- the language used — and let him say if 
it does not teach that the child (and the adult also) is actually 
regenerated in and by the act : 

SECTION II. 

The Ministration of Baptism to Infants. 

The minister \ coming to the font, which is to be filled with pure 
water, shall use the following : 

Dearly beloved, forasmuch as all men are conceived and 
born in sin, and that our Saviour Christ saith, None can enter 
into the kingdom of God, except he be regenerate and born 
anew of water and of the Holy Ghost ; I beseech you to 
call upon God the Father, through our Lord Jesus Christ, 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 417 

that of his bounteous mercy he will grant to this child that 
thing which by nature he cannot have, that he may be bap- 
tized with water and the Holy Ghost, and received into 
Christ's holy Church, and be made a lively member of the 
same. 

Then shall the minister say, 

LET US PRAY. 

Almighty and everlasting God, who of thy great mercy 
didst save Noah and his family in the ark from perishing by 
water; and also didst safely lead the children of Israel, thy 
people, through the Red Sea, figuring thereby thy holy bap- 
tism : and by the baptism of thy well-beloved Son Jesus 
Christ in the river Jordan, didst sanctify water for this holy 
sacrament : we beseech thee, for thine infinite mercies, that 
thou wilt look upon this child : wash him and sanctify him 
with the Holy Ghost ; that he, being delivered from thy 
wrath, may be received into the ark of Christ's Church, and 
being steadfast in faith, joyful through hope, and rooted in 
love, may so pass the waves of this troublesome world, that 
finally he may come to the land of everlasting life ; there to 
reign with thee, world without end, through Jesus Christ our 
Lord. Amen. 

O merciful God, grant that the old Adam in this child may 
be so buried, that the new man may be raised up in him. 
Amen. 

Grant that all carnal affections may die in him, and that 
all things belonging to the Spirit may live and grow in him. 
Amen. 

Grant that he may have power and strength to have victo- 
ry, and to triumph against the devil, the world, and the flesh. 
Amen. 

Grant that whosoever is dedicated to thee by our office 
and ministry may also be endued with heavenly virtues, and 
everlastingly rewarded through thy mercy, O blessed Lord 
God, who dost live and govern all things, world without end. 
Amen. 

Almighty, ever-living God, whose most dearly beloved 
Son Jesus Christ, for the forgiveness of our sins, did shed 
out of his most precious side both water and blood, and gave 

18* 



418 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

commandment to his disciples that they should go teach all 
nations, and baptize them in the name of the Father, and of 
the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ; regard, we beseech thee, 
the supplications of thy congregation ; sanctify this water 
for this holy sacrament ; and grant that this child now to be 
baptized may receive the fulness of thy grace, and ever re- 
main in the number of thy faithful and elect children, through 
Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. 

Then shall the people stand up ; and the minister shall say, 

Hear the words of the Gospel written by St. Mark, in the tenth chap- 
ter, at the thirteenth verse. 

They brought young children to Christ, that he should 
touch them. And his disciples rebuked those that brought 
them ; but when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and 
said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, 
and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of God. 
Verily 1 say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the 
kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein. 
And he took them up in his arms, put his hands upon them, 
and blessed them. 

Then the minister shall take the child into his hands, and soy 
to the friends of the child, 

Name this child. 

And then, naming it after them, he shall sprinkle or pour 
water upon it, or if desired, immerse it in water, saying, 

N., I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the 
Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen. 

Then shall be said, all kneeling, 

Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name j 
thy kingdom come ; thy will be done, on earth as it is in 
heaven ; give us this day our daily bread ; and forgive us 
our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us ; 
and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. 
Amen. 

Then shall the minister conclude with extemporary prayer. 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED, 419 

Are there not two distinct "orders," or rites? Un- 
questionably. Are they not for two wholly different charac- 
ters — the unconscious babe or the non-believing children, 
and adults'? Does not the infant of a day differ as much 
from an adult of twenty-two or fifty, as non-intelligence from 
intelligence — as irrationality from rationality ? and so far as 
being the subject of gospel address and gospel motives, as 
a bell differs from a believer 1 Then certainly the command 
to baptize a believer in Christ — and we have a command to 
baptize no other character — can no more be construed by 
Methodists into the liberty to baptize unconscious infants 
and non-believing children of a dozen years, than it can by 
the Papists into a permission to baptize bells, asses, and lo- 
comotives — which they do. 

Now, read carefully once more the ritual for infant bap- 
tism above, and note every word. 

Does it not teach that every infant is truly regenerated 
in the act % 

1. Are not words put into the mouth of the Saviour that 
he never used, in order to teach the doctrine that no infant 
or unbaptized person can be saved ? ! " Born anew of water 
and of the Holy Ghost," Christ never said ; but, " Except one 
be born of water and wind he cannot enter into the kingdom 
of heaven," he did say. This is what he said — these were 
the identical words he used. What he intended Nicodemus 
should understand by them is quite another matter. You 
have no right, and no man has any right, to correct the dic- 
tion of the Holy Spirit — to add to the word of God. Do 
you say there is no sense in the above expression, " born of 
water and w r ind V As well might you impeach the sense 
of this, a similar expression,-—" Except ye eat the flesh and 
drink the blood of the Son of God ye have no life in you." 
Will you understand the words in both instances as the 



420 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

Papists do ? which interpretations have led them, as it must 
every one, into the dogmas of baptismal regeneration and 
transubstantiation — sacramental salvation. But the Saviour 
explained to his disciples, " These words which I speak unto 
you, they are spirit " \i. e., spiritual — of spiritual signifi- 
cation]. 

Touching the passage in John iii., suffice it to say here, one 
of two positions must be taken — -either that the terms water 
and wind refer to a spiritual agent or agency, or that they 
must be understood literally, of literal ivind and literal water. 

The former supposition will agree well with the true ver- 
sion of the passage. Ye must be born (avodev) from above, 
not again. The latter interpretation inevitably plunges us 
into the unscriptural doctrine of Rome and Campbellism, 
and it will follow as an unavoidable consequence, that no 
one, infant or adult, has been saved since the words were 
uttered, or will evermore be saved, unless baptized. But 
to the language of the ritual. Unless it teaches baptismal 
regeneration, what mean these sentiments : "Call upon God 
the Father, through our Lord Jesus Christ, that of his boun- 
teous mercy he will grant to this child, that thing which by 
nature he cannot have, that he may be baptized with water 
and the Holy Ghost, and received into Christ's holy Church," 
&c ? What is that thing the child cannot have by nature, 
unless a new birth — regeneration of heart 1 ? And do not 
Methodists understand by the baptism of the Holy Ghost 
spiritual regeneration ? Undoubtedly. Comment is unne- 
cessary. Read the first prayer : " Didst sanctify water for 
this holy sacrament [sounds rather Popish], we beseech thee 
for thine infinite mercies that thou wilt look upon this child, 
wash him, and sanctify him, with the Holy Ghost." Does not 
this mean " regenerate it f 

" O merciful God, grant that the old Adam in this child 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED, 421 

may be so buried, that the new man may be raised up in 
him." 

This has reference to the act then about to be performed 
(and also to the original practice of immersion, burying in 
baptism), not to a future transaction ; for notice the conclud- 
ing sentiment, " Sanctify this water for this holy sacrament 
(what does this mean 1], and grant that this child now to be 
baptized may receive the fullness of thy grace and ever re- 
main in the number of thy faithful and elect children." Can 
there be any doubt that the prayer teaches that the child re- 
ceives the fullness of grace in the act of baptism, and by it 
is introduced into the new covenant, among God's regene- 
rated and elect children 1 

Another passage of God's word is perverted to teach the 
doctrine of infant baptism, " Suffer little children," &c, which 
has no possible reference to baptism, as the most distin- 
guished Pedobaptist commentators frankly admit. 

Have I not put a proper construction upon the language 
of the ritual 1 I appeal to Mr. Wesley himself. 

"It is certain our Church supposes that all who are bap- 
tized in infancy are at the same time born again, and it is 
allowed that the whole office for the baptism of infants pro- 
ceeds upon this supposition. Nor is it an objection of any 
weight against this that we cannot comprehend how this work 
can be wrought in an infant. For neither can we compre- 
hend how it is wrought in a person of riper years." — Sermon 
xlv. 

But to settle this question for ever, I submit extracts from 
Mr. Wesley's Treatise on Baptism in the Doctrinal Tracts, 
pages 246-259 ; and I quote paragraphs and pages, that no 
one may say I have garbled. 

" II. 1. What are the benefits we receive by baptism, is 
the next point to be considered. And the first of these is, 



422 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

the washing away the guilt of original sin, by the application 
of the merits of Christ's death. That we are all born under 
the guilt of Adam's sin, and that all sin deserves eternal 
misery, was the unanimous sense of the ancient Church, as it 
is expressed in the ninth Article of our own. And the 
Scripture plainly asserts that we were ' shapen in iniquity, 
and in sin did our mother conceive us ;' that '■ we were all 
by nature children of wrath, and dead in trespasses and 
sins ;' that ' in Adam all die ;' that ' by one man's disobe- 
dience all were made sinners;' that 'by one man sin enter- 
ed into the world, and death by sin ) which came upon all 
men, because all had sinned.' This plainly includes infants, 
for they too die ; therefore they have sinned : but not by 
actual sin, therefore by original ; else what need have they 
of the death of Christ % Yea, ' death reigned from Adam 
to Moses, even over those who had not sinned' actually 'ac- 
cording to the similitude of Adam's transgression.' This, 
which can relate to infants only, is a clear proof that the 
whole race of mankind are obnoxious both to the guilt and 
punishment of Adam's transgression. But ' as by the of- 
fence of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation, 
so by the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all 
men to justification of life.' And the virtue of this free 
gift, the merits of Christ's life and death, are applied to us 
in baptism. ' He gave himself for the Church, that he might 
sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the 
word;' (Eph. v. 25, 26;) namely, in baptism, the ordinary 
instrument of our justification. Agreeably to this, our Church 
prays in the baptismal office, that the person to be baptized 
may be ' washed and sanctified by the Holy Ghost, and 
being delivered from God's wrath, receive remission of sins, 
and enjoy the everlasting benediction of his heavenly wash- 
ing ;' and declares in the rubric at the end of the office, ' Tt 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 423 

is certain, by God's word, that children who are baptized, 
dying before they commit actual sin, are saved.' And this 
is agreeable to the unanimous judgment of all the ancient 
fathers. 

"2. By baptism we enter into covenant with God; into 
that everlasting covenant, which he hath commanded for ever ; 
(Psalm cxi. 9 ;) that new covenant, which he promised to 
make with the spiritual Israel ; even to ' give them a new 
heart and a new spirit, to sprinkle clean water upon them' 
(of which the baptismal is only a figure), 'and to remember 
their sins and iniquities no more;' in a word, to be their 
God, as he promised to Abraham, in the evangelical cove- 
nant which he made with him and all his spiritual offspring. 
(Gen. xxii. 7, 8.) And as circumcision was then the way of 
entering into this covenant, so baptism is now ; which is 
therefore styled by the apostle (so many good interpreters 
render his words), ' the stipulation, contract, or covenant of 
a good conscience with God.' 

" 3. By baptism we are admitted into the Church, and 
consequently made members of Christ, its head. The Jews 
were admitted into the Church by circumcision, so are the 
Christians by baptism. For ' as many as are baptized into 
Christ,' in his name, 'have' thereby 'put on Christ,' (Gal. 
iii. 27,) that is, are mystically united to Christ, and made 
one with him. For, ' by one Spirit we are all baptized into 
one body,' (1 Cor. xii. 13,) namely, the Church, 'the body 
of Christ.' (Eph. iv. 12.) From which spiritual, vital union 
with him, proceeds the influence of his grace on those that 
are baptized ; as from our union with the Church, a share in 
all its privileges, and in all the promises Christ has made 
to it. 

" 4. By baptism, we who were ' by nature children of 
wrath,' are made the children of God. And this regenera- 



424 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

tion which our Church in so many places ascribes to baptism 
is more than barely being admitted into the Church, though 
commonly connected therewith ; being ' grafted into the 
body of Christ's Church, we are made the children of God 
by adoption and grace.' This is grounded on the plain words 
of our Lord, ' Except a man be born again of water and of 
the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.' (John 
iii. 5.) By water then, as a means — the water of baptism — ■ 
we are regenerated or born again ; whence it is also called 
by the apostle, ' the washing of regeneration.' Our Church 
therefore ascribes no greater virtue to baptism than Christ 
himself has done. Nor does she ascribe it to the outward 
washing, but to the inward grace, which, added thereto, makes 
it a sacrament. Herein a principle of grace is infused, which 
will not be wholly taken away, unless we quench the Holy 
Spirit of God by long- continued wickedness. 

" 5. In consequence of our being made children of God, 
we are heirs of the kingdom of heaven. ' If children' (as 
the apostle observes) ' then heirs, heirs of God, and joint- 
heirs with Christ.' Herein we receive a title to, and an 
earnest of, ' a kingdom which cannot be moved.' Baptism 
doth now save us, if we live answerable thereto ; if we re- 
pent, believe, and obey the Gospel : supposing this, as it 
admits us into the Church here, so into glory hereafter. 

"III. 1. But did our Saviour design this should remain 
always in his Church 1 This is the third thing we are to con- 
sider. And this may be despatched in a few words, since 
there can be no reasonable doubt, but it was intended to 
last as long as the Church into which it is the appointed 
means of entering. In the ordinary way there is no other 
means of entering into the Church or into Heaven. 

" 2. In all ages, the outward baptism is a means of the 
inward ; as outward circumcision was of the circumcision of 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 425 

the heart. Nor would it have availed a Jew to say, ' I have 
the inward circumcision, and therefore do not need the out- 
ward too :' that soul was to be cut off from his people. He 
had despised, he had broken God's everlasting covenant, by 
despising the seal of it. (Gen. xvii. 14.) Now, the seal of cir- 
cumcision was to last among the Jews as long as the law 
lasted, to which it obliged them. By plain parity of reason, 
baptism, which came in its room, must last among Christ- 
ians as long as the Gospel covenant into which it admits, and 
whereunto it obliges all nations." 

"VI. 1. But the grand question is, Who are the proper 
subjects of baptism — grown persons only, or infants also ? 
In order to answer this fully, I shall, first, lay down the 
grounds of infant baptism, taken from Scripture, reason, and 
primitive, universal practice ; and secondly, answer the ob- 
jections against it. 

" 2. As to the ground of it : If infants are guilty of ori- 
ginal sin, then they are proper subjects of baptism ; seeing, 
in the ordinary way, they cannot be saved, unless this be 
washed away by baptism. It has been already proved, that 
this original stain cleaves to every child of man ; and that 
hereby they are children of wrath, and liable to eternal dam- 
nation. It is true, the Second Adam has found a remedy 
for the disease which came upon all by the offence of the 
first. But the benefit of this is to be received through the 
means which he hath appointed ; through baptism in parti- 
cular, which is the ordinary means he hath appointed for 
that purpose ; and to which God hath tied us, though he may 
not have tied himself. Indeed, where it cannot be had, the 
case is different ; but extraordinary cases do not make void 
a standing rule. This, therefore, is our first ground. Infants 
need to be washed from original sin ; therefore they are 
proper subjects of baptism." 



426 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

" 10. To sum up the evidence ; If outward baptism be gen- 
erally, in an ordinary way, necessary to salvation, and in- 
fants may be saved as well as adults, nor ought we to neglect 
any means of saving them." &c. 

Comment upon the above extracts is unnecessary ; the 
doctrine of baptismal regeneration runs through every line, 
and imbues the whole. The Roman Catholic Church, or Mr. 
A. Campbell, or Mr. Pusey, never advocated the dogma in 
stronger or more explicit terms. Those extracts, like the 
teachings of the ritual, are a mass of doctrinal corruption 
and putrefaction. Call you such sentiments Protestantism ? 
Call you such teachings evangelical ? Call you such doctrine 
Christianity? They are the inversion and perversion of 
Christianity. 

Can it be longer denied by an honest man, that the Method- 
ist Church teaches that infants and children are not only really 
regenerated, and made the children of God by and in baptism, 
but that, monstrous to say, ordinarily all infants and child, 
ren dying unbaptized are lost ! What says the Church? " If 
infants are guilty of original sin, then they are proper sub- 
jects of baptism ; seeing in the ordinary way they cannot 
be saved unless this be washed away. 

Two remarks here, before passing to the second baptism. 

1. We see why Methodists are so anxious to have their 
sick and dying, I had almost said dead, infants sprinkled. 
They have been known to send for the preacher, to come at 
midnight through darkness and storm, and for miles, to 
sprinkle the infant when its death-rattle mingled with the 
popish mummery of the ritual ! And is this Protestantism ? 
Is it not more like papism 1 I ask it in kindness — in sorrow 
and heartfelt grief. Infant regeneration and salvation under- 
lie infant rites in every community ; the operation is a sol- 
emn farce, unless there is some efficacy attached. 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 427 

2. Methodists are the last people in the world who should 
impute to Baptists the sin of making too much of baptism 
— of teaching that no one can be saved without baptism 1 It 
is the thief's cry with them. They do it to divert attention 
from the ground they occupy. 

3. Methodists may say that the above teachings are not 
now the teachings of their " Church." I reply, 

1. They were Mr. Wesley's teachings, who is the boasted 
father of all Methodists. 

2. They are the teachings of the Discipline, which is the 
only supreme standard of faith and practice acknowledged 
by the " Church." 

3. The books that contain them (Wesley's Sermons and 
Doctrinal Tracts) have been published yearly by the Book 
Concern, under the direction of the General Conference since 
the days of Wesley ; and I copied the above extracts in the 
" Concern" itself, so that there might be no mistake. 

4. I could submit other standard authorities published 
annually by the Concern, were it necessary. 

Through her Discipline and the books she publishes does 
she only teach authoritatively and unmistakably. 
The above is one baptism and its design. 



LETTER XXXV. 



Adult Baptism distinct from infant — Its design, with the ex- 
ception — No faith required of the adult, save that required 
by the Romish Church — And no profession of regeneration 
as a condition of baptism — Regeneration ordinarily the same 
with baptism. 

Dear Sir: — Having considered the teachings of your 
Church touching infant baptism, I now wish to show that 
adult baptism is a different ordinance from infant baptism, 
The subject is altogether different. This is the baptism of a 
moral agent ; that, of a subject to which the terms " moral" 
and "agent" cannot be sensibly applied. This is the baptism 
of an intelligent rational creature ; that, of a creature to which 
these terms are inapplicable. This, of a believer (though 
the office does not intimate it, save that he believes the 
Catholic Creed, adopted at the Council of Nice) ; that, of a 
non-believer. This, of a subject of gospel address ; that, of 
a subject nowhere addressed in the gospei, or commanded 
either to believe or be baptized. Tor adult baptism the 
Discipline enjoins the use of a different ritual. In this "order" 
the candidate is questioned, and is called upon to repeat the 
Creed. In infant baptism no questions are asked, though 
they used to be put to the sponsors — the godfathers and 
godmothers who answered for the child ! 

Baptism is administered to both the adult and infant 
subject with the same design, i. e., to wash away original sin 
and regenerate the heart, with this solitary exception, that 

(423) 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 429 

in the case of the infant subject regeneration always takes 
place in connection with the act, while in the case of the 
adult it is uncertain. It ordinarily does best, nevertheless, 
if the subject is a pretty hard case. The result is extremely 
problematical. I submit the formula for the baptism of 
adults. 

The opening remarks are, with a few unimportant words, 
the same, and I omit them. 

"Then shall the minister say, 

"Almighty and immortal God, the aid of all that need, the 
helper of all that flee to thee for succor, the life of them that 
believe, and the resurrection of the dead : we call upon thee 
for these persons • that they, coming to thy holy baptism, may 
receive remission of their sins, by spiritual regeneration. Re- 
ceive them, O Lord, as thou hast promised by thy well-beloved 
Son, saying, Ask, and ye shall receive ; seek, and ye shall 
find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: so give now 
unto us that ask ; let us that seek, find ; open the gate unto 
us that knock : that these persons may enjoy the everlasting 
benediction of thy heavenly washing, and may come to the 
eternal kingdom which thou hast promised by Christ our 
Lord. . Amen. 

After which he shall say, 

"Almighty and everlasting God, heavenly Father, we give 
thee humble thanks, for that thou hast vouchsafed to call us to 
the knowledge of thy grace, and faith in thee ; increase this 
knowledge and confirm this faith in us evermore. Give thy 
Holy Spirit to these persons, that they may be born again, 
and be made heirs of everlasting salvation through our Lord 
Jesus Christ, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy 
Spirit, now and for ever. Amen. 

Then shall the people stand up, and the minister shall say, 

Hear the words of the Gospel, written by St. John, in the third chap- 
ter, beginning at the first verse. 

" There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a 



430 THE GllEAT IRON WHEEL. 

ruler of the Jews : the same came to Jesus by night, and said 
unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from 
God : for no man can do these miracles that thou doest ex- 
cept God be with him. Jesus answered and said unto him, 
Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, 
he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus saith unto 
him, How can a man be born when he is old % Can he enter 
the second time into his mother's womb, and be born 1 
Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man 
be born of water, and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the 
kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh ; 
and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not 
that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. The wind 
bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, 
but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth : so 
is every one that is born of the Spirit. 

Then the minister shall speak to the persons to he baptized on 
this wise : — 

" Well beloved, who are come hither, desiring to receive 
holy baptism, ye have heard how the congregation hath 
prayed that our Lord Jesus Christ would vouchsafe to re- 
ceive you, and bless you, to release you of your sins, to give 
you the kingdom of heaven, and everlasting life. And our 
Lord Jesus Christ hath promised, in his holy word, to grant 
all those things that we have prayed for : which promise he 
for his part will most surely keep and perform. 

" Wherefore after this promise made by Christ, you must 
also faithfully, for your part, promise, in the presence of this 
whole congregation, that you will renounce the devil and all 
his works, and constantly believe God's holy word, and 
obediently keep his commandments. 

Then shall the minister demand of each of the persons to be 
baptized, severally, 

Q. Dost thou renounce the devil and all his works, the 
vain pomp and glory of the world, with all covetous desires 
of the same, and the carnal desires of the flesh, so that thou 
wilt not follow or be led by them ? 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 431 

-4. I renounce them all. 

Q. Dost thou believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker 
of heaven and earth ? and in Jesus Christ his only-begotten 
son our Lord*? and that he was conceived by the Holy Ghost, 
born of the Virgin Mary ? that he suffered under Pontius 
Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried ; that he rose again 
the third day ; that he ascended into heaven, and sitteth at 
the right hand of God the Father Almighty, and from thence 
shall come again, at the end of the world, to judge the quick 
and the dead ? 

And dost thou believe in the Holy Ghost, the holy catholic 
Church, the communion of saints ; the remission of sins ; the 
resurrection of the body, and everlasting life after death? 

A. All this I steadfastly believe. 

Q. Wilt thou be baptized in this faith ? 

A. This is my desire. 

Q. Wilt thou then obediently keep God's holy will and 
commandments, and walk in the same all the days of thy 
life? 

A. I will endeavor so to do, God being my helper. 

Then shall the minister say, 

" O merciful God, grant that the old Adam in these persons 
may be so buried, that the new man may be raised up in 
them. Amen. 

" Grant that all carnal affections may die in them, and that 
all things belonging to the Spirit may live and grow in them. 
Amen. 

" Grant that they may have power and strength to have 
victory, and triumph against the devil, the world, and the 
flesh. Amen. 

' ; Grant that they being here dedicated to thee by our office 
and ministry, may also be endued with heavenly virtues, 
and everlastingly rewarded, through thy mercy, O blessed 
Lord God, who dost live and govern all things, world with- 
out end. Amen. 

"Almighty, ever-living God, whose most dearly-beloved 
Son Jesus Christ, for the forgiveness of our sins, did shed 
out of his most precious side both water and blood ; and 



432 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

gave commandment to his disciples that they should go 
teach all nations, and baptize them in the name of the Father, 
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost : regard, we beseech 
thee, the supplications of this congregation ; and grant that 
the persons now to be baptized may receive the fullness of thy 
grace, and ever remain in the number of thy faithful and elect 
children, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. 

Then shall the minister take each person to be baptized by the 
right hand : and placing him conveniently by the font, ac- 
cording to his discretion, shall ask the name ; and then shall 
sprinkle or pour water upon him (or if he shall desire it, 
shall immerse him in water), saying, 

iV., I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the 
Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen. 

Then shall be said the Lord^s Prayer, all kneeling. 

" Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name ; 
thy kingdom come ; thy will be done on earth, as it is in 
heaven : give us this day our daily bread ; and forgive us 
our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us : 
and lead us not into temptation ; but deliver us from evil. 
A men. 

[Then let the minister conclude with extemporary prayer, ,] 

Does not this " whole office" proceed upon the supposi- 
tion that baptism is for the spiritual regeneration of the adult 
subject, as well as of the infant 1 Is a profession of regenera- 
tion required of the adult, as a condition of baptism ? Mark 
this question well, read over the whole ritual, and see if it is 
anywhere intimated as necessary 1 The declaration will be 
considered extravagant — preposterous, that the Methodist, 
Espiscopal Church does not require of adults a profession of 
either evangelical faith in Christ, or regeneration of heart as 
conditions of baptism ! It requires a profession of a faith, I 
confess, but what kind of faith ? Identically the same, with the 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 483 

exception of four words, and none other, that the Church of 
Rome requires of her subjects ! I know there are thousand'? 
who would not believe this up'on the assertion of any man 
unless a bishop, and I submit it. Here it is — I take it from 
the Golden Manual of the Romish Church. The book is 
stamped with three sacred crosses. 

"I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven 
and earth; and in Jesus Christ, his only-begotten Son our 
Lord ; and that he was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born 
of the Virgin Mary ; that he suffered under Pontius Pilate, 
was crucified, dead, and buried ; he descended into hell ; that 
he rose again the third day ; that he ascended into heaven , 
and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty, and 
from thence shall come again, at the end of the world, to 
judge the quick and the dead. 

" T believe in the Holy Ghost ; the holy catholic Church ; 
the communion of saints ; the remission of sins ; the resur- 
rection of the body ; and everlasting life after death." 

The four words are, " he descended into hell." The Meth- 
odist Episcopal Church requires a renunciation of the devil 
and all his works and pomps, and so does the Catholic. 

The Priest asks, w Dost thou renounce Satan V 

A. " I do renounce him." 

P. "And all his works ?" 

A. "I do renounce them." 

P. "And all his pomps V 

A. " I do renounce them." 

P. " Wilt thou be baptized ?" [i. <?., into this faith.] 

A. " I will." 

Compare these questions with those in the Methodist for- 
mula as given above ! Are not here sufficient proofs of the 
popish origin and character of the Methodist Discipline % Call 
you this Protestantism 1 Is it Christianity 1 And am I asked 
to enter a " Church" in which T am to be baptized, married, 
19 



43 i THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

and buried with the mangled forms and mummeries of the 
Romish Church — the Mother of Harlots'? I demand an 
answer to this question, — Does the Methodist Church require 
a profession of evangelical faith in Christ, or personal re- 
generation as a condition of baptism 1 Is not the only faith 
she requires identical with that required by Rome — a belief 
in one God, in Jesus Christ as his only-begotten son, who 
was born in the flesh, was crucified, buried, and rose the third 
day ; a belief in the Holy Ghost, and in the holy Catholic 
Church ? And only the same sort of belief in God and Christ 
as in the holy Catholic Church % It is painful to contemplate ! 
What can Methodists say against the faith of Campbell is ml 
Mr. A. Campbell requires as much, and alas ! the same sort 
of faith required by the Discipline ! I urge the candid to 
think of this feature in Methodist doctrine. 

I now allow Mr. Wesley to explain the difference between 
the design of infant and adult baptisms. 

" From the preceding reflections we may observe that as 
the new birth is not always the same thing with baptism 
(and Mr. Campbell maintains that it always is ; and he is far 
more consistent, for if it ever is, it undoubtedly. always is), 
as it does not always accompany baptism, they do not con- 
stantly go together. A man may possibly be born of water, 
and yet not be born of the Spirit. There may sometimes 
be the outward sign, where there is not the inward grace. I 
do not now speak of infants ; it is certain our Church sup- 
poses that all who are baptized in infancy are at the same | 
time born again, as it is allowed that the whole office for the 
baptism of infants proceeds upon this supposition." — (Ser- 
mon xlv.) In addition to this explanation, will the reader turn 
back to the last letter, and read attentively Mr. Wesley's 
views of the design of baptism when administered to an 
adult, in the quotations from the Doctrinal Tracts ? They 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 435 

are the doctrines of the Methodist Episcopal Church, be- 
cause endorsed by its annual republication by the " Book 
Concern." 

It will be evident that no profession of regeneration is re- 
quired of the adult, because it is ordinarily effected in the 
water of baptism ! 

In consideration of these teachings, can Baptists, with any 
kind of reason, be called upon to recognize the Methodist 
Episcopal society as a Christian or Gospel Church, Is it 
a congregation of believers, according to the definition of the 
Discipline, in which the word of God is faithfully preached, 
and the ordinances duly administered 1 

If the practice of Methodists is not always according to 
the Discipline, it is only because the preachers and members 
violate their solemn oaths and promises to observe it in 
" every point great and small," and who can tell what it would 
be were it not for the counteracting influence of Baptist doc- 
trines and practice in this country ? 



LETTER XXXVI. 



Infant Baptism in a New Light— Tried by the Creed, the 
Catechism, and the Ritual, and condemned by the word of 
Q. d — Thirty untruths taught in the baptism of one infant. 

Dear Sir : — I propose to examine the doctrine of infant 
baptism in the light of your catechism, your creed, and the 
teachings of your ritual, and show you how contradictory 
they are. .To this you cannot object. The ritual of a reli- 
gion is a most accurate expression of its system of doctrine. 
The pompous ceremonies with which you have invested the 
baptism of an infant are not mere accidents — mere fopperies, 
or devised for dramatic effect alone. Your prayers, and col- 
lects, and formula, are certainly not regarded by you as mere 
mummeries. They embody a meaning — they express your 
doctrine. They address not more directly the imagination 
than the faith of the worshippers. 

It is, sir, a matter of astonishment to me, that the oppo- 
site teachings of your creed, and your ritual for baptism, have 
not long since convinced the reflecting of your members that 
the doctrine of infant baptism cannot be proved to be an 
evangelical creed. It hangs to your creed like a parasite — a 
something foreign and uncongenial to it. The teaching of 
your creed and your ritual are utterly irreconcilable. The 
creed declares baptism to be a sacrament — and of course 
always a sacrament, whether administered to adult or infant. 

" There are two sacraments ordained of Christ our Lord 

(486) 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. -137 

in the gospel ; that is to say , baptism and the Supper of the 
Lord." — Art. xvi. 

Now Mr. Wesley quotes, with approbation, the catechism 
of the Church of England, to explain the meaning of a sacra- 
ment : 

Q. What are the parts of a sacrament? 
'A. The parts of a sacrament are two : the outward and 
sensible sign ; the other, the inward and spiritual grace 
thereby signified. 

U ~Q. What is baptism 1 

"A. Baptism is a sacrament -wherein Christ hath ordained 
the washing of water to be a sign and seal of regeneration by 
his Spirit. 

U Q: What meanest thou by this word sacrament? 

"A. i mean aw outward visible sign of an inward and spi- 
ritual grace. 

im Q. What is the outward part or form in baptism ? 

"A. Water, wherein the person is to be baptized in the 
name of the Father, and of the Son, and Holy Ghost. 

"Q. What is the inward part or thing signified 1 

"A. A death unto sin, and a new birth unto righteous- 
ness." — Sermon Iv. 

All this is sound doctrine. I most heartily accept of this 
definition of the sacrament of baptism, even to its action ; for 
it evidently teaches that the subject must be put into the 
water. It reads, " Water, wherein the person is to be bap- 
tized." But if this definition be correct, is the baptism of an 
infant a sacrament? and if not, is it haptism at all, in any 
sense ? 

Baptism, to be considered a sacrament, must always have 
these "two parts," the outward visible sign, and the inward and 
spiritual grace signified. In infant baptism there is, I grant, 
the outward sign, " water," but is there the second part, the 



438 THE GPwEAT IRON WHEEL. 

inward spiritual grace signified by the sign? The sign 
is declarative to the world that there is an inward grace 
possessed by the subject — a work of grace wrought in his 
heart by the Holy Spirit. But, in the case of an uncon- 
scious infant, or a child of a few years, does this inward spi- 
ritual grace — regeneration of heart — exist 1 Who will say 
that it ever does'? All children are born into the world 
with a corrupt nature, according to your Art. VII., which 
they invariably evince by a depraved life, until they, having 
believed in Christ, are renewed by the Holy Spirit ; and who 
then will say that of the thousands of infant children annu- 
ally baptized in the Methodist societies, one of them 
possessed the second and all-important part of the sacra- 
ment — the thing signified — the inward and spiritual grace, 
without which no rite or form of earth can be a sacrament? 
Then it follows that when the visible sign of baptism is 
placed upon such, it is a false sign ; it tells an untruth ; it 
tends to deceive the world — the subject does not possess that 
of which the sign declares him possessed. The sign is a 
falsehood — a cheat, calculated to deceive not the world only, 
but the subject himself, in after years ; for when he comes to 
read and understand the creed and the ritual, if he believes 
them, if he has confidence in his parents — in their faith, if in 
his priest or minister, then he must believe that he either 
was a Christian when he was baptized, according to the creed 
and the catechism, or that he was made a Christian, i. e., 
regenerated and made an elect child of God, and initiated 
into the new and everlasting covenant, in and by his baptism, 
according to the ritual ; and thus by the teachings of these, 
ten to one that the subject is deceived and cheated out of 
his soul. 

These are not empty rites and unmeaning forms; these 
words used at baptism are not designed to be mere flum- 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 489 

merits and mummeries . The rite itself, and the language 

' Do 

used, are all full of significance ; they teach a doctrine, and 
that in the most impressive manner. When the minister 
declares baptism to be a sacrament in the case of an infant 
or child, and administers the rite in the name of the Trinity, 
he declares to the world that that infant or child has the 
thing signified — is possessed of the inward and spiritual grace, 
and thus misteaches and deceives the world. The world 
look to see those baptized children exhibit some of the fruits 
as "evidences of that state of heart the Church said at their 
baptism they did possess ; but, instead, they find the unfruit- 
ful works of the flesh and darkness in every instance. And 
more, just so soon as they have come to years of discretion 
and accountability — even before — the world hears these very 
ministers who baptized them, and thus pronounced them re- 
generate and sanctified in heart by the Holy Spirit, declaring 
that these very " elect children" are the children of wrath, 
even as others, exposed to the wrath of God, and calling 
them to repentance and regeneration ! What must the 
world say, but that either religion itself is a farce, a hypoc- 
risy and falsehood, or that your rituals for infant baptism 
are false 1 In either case religion is the sufferer. 

How does the world look upon the man who hangs out a 
false sign, or sails under false colors? A merchant in your 
town advertises hi the papers, and hangs out the sign, in 
flaming letters, over his store door, that he has a lot of very 
rare silks or teas for sale, extremely cheap. Customers flock 
in from all the country around ; they enter the town and look 
out for the sign. They read it — 



Silks and Teas for sale here 



!'• 



They throng to the store, and there sits the man, and not 
u rag, not a shred of any thing upon his shelves ! Has he not 



440 THE GREAT IROX WHEEL. 

deceived them, and will they not look upon him as a dis- 
honest man, and a deceiver ? He hangs out his sign in the 
papers, and places it over his door, and he has not the thing 
signified, and he knows he has it not. I leave the reader to 
make the application. 

But you may hang your defence for consistency upon the 
only possible hook in the creed or ritual, i. e., that the inward 
and spiritual grace signified is actually and in every instance 
wrought invisibly by the Spirit within the infant, by or in the 
application of water ; for thus teaches the article : 

" XVI. Of the Sacraments. — Sacraments, ordained of 
Christ, are not only badges or tokens of Christian men's 
profession ; but rather they are certain signs of grace, and 
God's good will toward us, by the which he doth work invisi- 
bly in us, and doth not only quicken, but also strengthen 
and confirm our faith in him." 

Lest some one may mistake this language, I will allow 
Mr. Wesley to explain it. 

"By baptism, we, who were 'by nature children of wrath,' 
are made the children of God. And this regeneration which 
our Church in so many places ascribes to baptism is more 
than barely being admitted into the Church, though com- 
monly connected therewith ; being ' grafted into the body of 
Christ's Church, we are made the children of God by adop- 
tion and grace.' This is grounded on the plain words of our 
Lord, ' Except a man be born again of water and of the 
Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.' (John iii. 5.) 
By water, then, as a means — the water of baptism — we are 
regenerated or born again; whence it is also called by the 
apostles, 'the washing of regeneration.' Our Church there- 
fore ascribes no greater virtue to baptism than Christ him- 
self has done. Nor does she ascribe it to the outward 
washing, but to the inward grace, which, added thereto, 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 441 

makes it a sacrament. Herein a principle of grace is infused, 
which will not be wholly taken away, unless we quench the 
Holy Spirit of God by long-continued wickedness." 

Mark him well. " By water, then, as a means — the water 
of baptism — we are regenerated or born again." " Herein — ■ 
i. e., in baptism — a principle of grace is infused." ! ! 

Very well, what follows but that your Church actually 
holds and teaches the abominable doctrine of baptismal re- 
generation, as taught by the Romish Church ? The practice 
of infant baptism is alone consistent upon this ground ; but 
where is the consistency of your practice ? Just so soon as 
those water-regenerated Christians are old enough to under- 
stand, you tell them they are depraved in heart and ex- 
posed to wrath even as others, and must come to Christ 
and seek regeneration ! How is it, I ask, that the whole 
mass of your baptized children, without a single exception, 
are found unregenerated the very first day of their accounta- 
bility ? 

But the catechism contradicts the ritual. It says, " Baptism 
is a sacrament wherein Christ hath ordained the washing of 
water to be a sign and seal of regeneration by his S2nrit." 
Now, sir, the thing must be in existence — the contract must 
be written — the note must be drawn and filled — before 
the seal is affixed to it. Unless every blank is filled, the 
document, although signed with the seal, is a nullity, and the 
whole transaction of witnessing and signing, a farce. Then 
if baptism, in the case of infants and children, is indeed both 
a sign and seal of regeneration by the Spirit, unquestionably 
that regeneration must exist — the heart of every infant and 
child to which baptism is administered, must be spiritually 
regenerated before the seal — the water — is applied, or the 
transaction is a solemn farce, and infant baptism a false 
paper. 

19* 



442 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

I confess my utter inability to see how a thing — a tran- 
saction — can be a sign and a seal, and produce the thing sig- 
nified, at one and the same time. Affixing the seal of the 
state to a piece of white paper does not fill that paper with 
the contract, or writing — the thing sealed ! The merchant 
does not fill his store with goods by simply putting *the sign 
over his door. To the man of common sense, it is time 
enough to hang out the sign after the goods are upon the 
shelves. 

The catechism is senseless, or your creed and ritual are 
false, or words are not the signs of ideas. 

But there is a doctrine, to my mind, still more awful, in- 
culcated in the above language of the catechism ; and that is, 
that baptism administered by mortal man is a seal of re- 
generation — of the new and everlasting covenant, or that it 
is a " sealing ordinance?" 1 This matter of sealing, when it 
comes to a soul, is a fearful business. In holy Scripture, 
there are only two sealings mentioned — a sealing a mem- 
ber's title to the benefits of the new covenant, which is seal- 
ing him unto the day of redemption, and sealing unto eter- 
nal destruction. 

Let us look into the nature of sealing. When the seal of 
State, or of an individual, is affixed to a document, that docu- 
ment must for ever remain in the letter and spirit in which 
it existed when sealed. To enter a new clause, or to change a 
line of an old one, would be forgery. To add a clause 
helow the seal, would be of no force. To seal a piece of 
blank paper would be the sheerest folly. Now, will you 
contend that baptism is a sealing ordinance — a seal of the 
new and everlasting covenant, which God has intrusted in 
the hands of his ministers % Then, like the key power, whom- 
soever they seal on earth is so sealed for heaven, and what- 
soever is unsealed has no part or title to the blpssings of 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 443 

the new covenant, here or hereafter. If baptism is such a 
seal, then the character — the moral relation of the subject 
(for this is the thing sealed) — must forever remain as when 
the seal was applied. The document is for ever and un- 
alterably finished. If the heart of the subject is right in 
the sight of God, it must remain for ever so — and if, even 
through the mistake of the agent, it is not right, then it is for 
ever so sealed. The inviolable seal of the Great King is 
affixed, and it must remain and the document go up to judg- 
ment. 

Nothing can be introduced into the contract after the seal 
is placed upon it — to write it below the seal is of no binding- 
force. If baptism is indeed a seal, then must the subject 
ever remain in the state his heart was in when it was applied 
to him, regenerate or unregenerate. 

But baptism is not God's seal to the new covenant — not 
his seal at all. He never thus intrusted the souls of his 
creatures into the hands of men, however pious — for the 
most pious are fallible, and liable to err. The King in- 
trusts his seal to no one. 

•; Now he which established us with you in Christ, and 
hath anointed us is God, who hath also sealed us and given 
us the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts." 

" In whom after that ye believed ye were sealed with the 
Holy Spirit of promise." 

"And grieve not the Holy Spirit of God whereby ye are 
sealed unto the day of redemption." 

I have not language in which to express my utter ab- 
horrence to, and repudiation of, these popish doctrines of 
sacramental efficacy and ritual regeneration and salvation. 

It is not part of Christianity — but Christianity inverted. 
The logical consequence of the above teaching is, that no un- 
baptized person, adult or infant, is regenerated, and of course 



444 THE GKEAT IRON WHEEL. 

saved ; and this was the unanimous judgment of the ancient 
fathers who originated the dogma of baptismal regenera- 
tion, which was adopted by the Man of Sin, seeing as he 
did that he could by it inseparably connect the salvation of 
all men with the sacraments of his Church, and place them 
in the hands of his priests. 

Mr. Wesley nowhere in his treatise intimates that an 
adult or infant can ordinarily be justified or saved, unless 
baptized. Read attentively his language : 

"And the virtue of this free gift, the merits of Christ's life 
and death, are applied to us in baptism. ' He gave himself 
for the Church, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the 
washing of water by the word;' (Eph. v. 25, 26;) viz., in 
baptism, the ordinary instrument of our justification. Agree- 
ably to this, our Church prays in the baptismal office, that 
the person to be baptized may be ' washed and sanctified by 
the Holy Ghost, and, being delivered from God's wrath, 
receive remission of sins, and enjoy the everlasting bene- 
diction of his heavenly w r ashing ;' and declares in the rubric 
at the end of the office, ' It is certain, by God's word, that 
children who are baptized, dying before they commit actual 
sin, are saved.' And this is agreeable to the unanimous judg- 
ment of all the ancient fathers." 

The infant baptism of your ritual, therefore, nullifies and 
stultifies three articles of your Church. 

" XII. Of the Church. — The visible Church of Christ is a 
congregation of faithful men, in which the pure word of God 
is preached, and the sacraments duly administered, accord- 
ing to Christ's ordinance, in all those things that of necessity 
are requisite to the same." 

Is your society — the Methodist Episcopal Church, if you 
please — a congregation of faithful men — of believers ? for such 
is the definition of the phrase. Are there not more infante 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 445 

and children within its pale than professed believers, taking 
no account of seekers ? 

But who will say that the sacrament of baptism is duly 
administered, vhen administered according to the teachings 
of your Discipline, explained by Mr. Wesley, and the stand- 
ard works published by your Book Concern 1 And what in- 
telligent Christian man will say, that the Supper is duly ad- 
ministered in your Church, when it is administered to unre- 
generated and unhaptized seekers ? 

I repeat what I have before said, that, according to the 
above article, your societies are not visible churches of 
Christ, and ought not to be so recognized. You may say 
that baptized infants and seekers are not exactly members 
of the Church, and are, therefore, not counted. " But all who 
are baptized are admitted into the Church — are baptized into 
the Church," says Mr. Wesley. " By baptism we are ad- 
mitted into the Church, and consequently made members of 
Christ, its head." " For by one Spirit are we baptized into 
one body, (1 Cor. xii. 13,) viz., the Church." — Doc. Tracts, 
p. 248. All your standard writers admit, that they are 
actually members of the Christian Church. The great, and 
now the only argument left in your mouths proves this, i. e., 
that infants were admitted into the Jewish Church by cir- 
cumcision, and into the Christian, by baptism, which comes 
in its place. 

Infant baptism stultifies this article also : — 

" XVII. Of Baptism. — Baptism is not only a sign of 
profession, and a mark of difference, whereby Christians are 
distinguished from others that are not baptized, but it is also 
a sign of regeneration, or the new birth. The baptism of 
young children is to be retained in the Church." 

Is baptism, when administered to an infant or non-believ- 
ing child, "a sign of profession?"' What profession doe? 



446 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

an unconscious infant make — does an unregenerate child 
make 1 In what respect is it a mark of difference, whereby 
Christians are distinguished from others that are not bap- 
tized? Do you, indeed, believe the teachings of your ritual 
and Mr. Wesley's, that all infants are made Christians, or 
that an infant ever was made a Christian, by an infusion of 
grace in or by baptism I If you do, do you believe your 
own preaching, when you call upon them to repent and be 
regenerated, so soon as they are old enough to comprehend 
your language 1 Is baptism, when applied to infants, in very 
truth a sign of regeneration, or the " new birth ? M If you do 
believe it, the world believes it a lying sign. 

But, sir, your infant baptism subverts the vital doctrine 
of justification by faith alone, so justly set forth in your 
Articles, and so fully nullified by your ritual. 

" IX. Of the Justification of Man. — We are accounted 
r-ighteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord 
and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, and not for our own 
works or deservings. Wherefore, that we are justified by 
faith only, is a most wholesome doctrine, and very full of 
comfort." 

This article clearly sets forth that we are justified by faith 
only. Now, that all who are truly regenerated are, at the 
same time, justified, you will admit ; but all baptized infants 
are regenerated, according to your ritual and Mr. Wesley, 
therefore, all baptized infants are justified. Are they "justi- 
fied " by faith only ? They exercise no faith. They are 
justified by baptism — which is a work — as a means. Mr. 
Wesley says, " in baptism, the ordinary instrument of our 
justification.'''' 

" Tie ordinary instrument ! " Has God a common and 
an uncommon instrument of justification for those for whom 
the preaching or ordina ?es of the gospel is intended/? Mr. 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 417 

Wesley has nowhere explained the extraordinary instrument 
of justification. 

I leave the reader to judge if even the baptism of adults, 
according to the teachings of the ritual and Mr. Wesley, does 
not also stultify the above Article IX. 

To conclude this part of the subject : There are but two 
births — a natural birth and a spiritual birth. No man can 
be born naturally — of the flesh — but once, and no man 
can be born spiritually — of the Spirit — but once. The Scrip- 
ture nowhere' teaches that a man can be born of the Spirit, 
or regenerated,, twice or thrice. I, therefore, am forced to 
the conclusion, that if the teachings of your Church, that all 
baptized infants are, indeed, regenerated, then they are al- 
ways regenerated — always Christians. The grace of regener- 
ation is a grace from which there is no falling. I am 
aware that you believe with Mr. Wesley, that " Herein, i. e., 
in baptism, a principle of grace is infused, which will not be 
wholly taken away, unless we quench the Holy Spirit of 
God by long-continued wickedness." But then you must 
admit that no one who does fall from a state of regeneration 
can be regenerated the second time. Why, then, do you 
preach the possibility of repentance and regeneration to those 
children baptized in infancy ? 

You must either blot the ritual for infant baptism from 
your Discipline, and expurgate the writings of Mr. Wesley 
and your standard writers, as now published by your Book 
Concern, or teach and practise differently. There is no al- 
ternative left you. 

My mind has been impressed with the amount of false 
teaching, the number of errors taught by you in the baptism 
of a solitary infant. Let us begin with the ritual. 

1. The Methodist minister, in his instruction, is made to 
apply the language of the Saviour to Nieodemus, in John 



448 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

iii. 3, to water baptism, and it manifestly has no such ap- 
plication. 

2. That a man is regenerated and born anew of the 
water of baptism and the Holy Ghost. 

3. He is made to add to the word of God, by saying 
'"the Holy Ghost," when it reads in the original, of "wind, 
or spirit.' 1 

4. He teaches the people that it is their duty to call upon 
God, to grant to the child in his baptism that thing which by 
nature it cannot have, i. e., regeneration, which is false. 

5. That God would grant that the old Adam in the child 
may be so buried in the act, that the new man may rise up. 

6. And that a child — an unconscious infant — is capable of 
receiving the fulness of grace. 

7. And that, by its baptism, it can and is placed in the 
number of God's elect children. See first collect. 

8. This language of Christ, " Suffer little children," &c, 
is applied to teach the duty of infant baptism, which is a 
gross misapplication of it. 

9. In the instruction given to the ministers, viz., " He shall 
sprinkle or pour water upon it, or, if desired, immerse it in 
the water ;" thus teaching that sprinkling or pouring water 
upon the subject is an act of baptism. 

10. That sprinkling or pouring water upon, and immersing 
the subject in water, are one and the same baptism. 

11. All who say " I baptize," and yet do not baptize, utter 
a falsehood. That Roman Catholic priest who sprinkled a 
baby with sand, and said, t; / baptize thee,' 11 and that one who 
merely said the words, ' : I baptize,"' &c. without any water, 
and without any sand, uttered falsehoods, no more real than 
the man who wets the face of a baby, and says " I baptize ;" 
for neither is any baptism in any sense. 

12. If he means that he sprinkles the infant in the name, ?>., 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 449 

by the authority of the Father, he utters another untruth ; 
for the Father has nowhere given him authority to perform 
such an act. 

13. If he means the authority of the Son, this is also an 
untruth ; for Christ gave no such command. 

14. " Of the Holy Ghost "—and this is false ; for the 
Spirit has nowhere intimated the authority for such a practice. 

15. If the minister means, into the jurisdiction, or into a 
state of subordination to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, 
he utters another untruth ; for he baptizes'the child into the 
jurisdiction of the bishop, and of the preacher, and of the 
presiding eider. 

18. Suppose he attempts to explain the benefits resulting 
from baptism, and especially from infant baptism, and re- 
peats the teachings of Mr. Wesley, as quoted in this letter. 
The first benefit we receive by baptism is the washing away 
the guilt of original sin, by the application of the merits of 
Christ's death. This is the 16th untruth. 

17. Baptism is the ordinary instrument of our justification. 

18. "That children who are baptized, dying before they 
commit actual sin, are saved." This, if language has any 
meaning, implies that children who are unbaptized, dying 
before they commit actual sin, are damned, which is false- 
hood No. 18. 

19. By baptism, we enter into the new, the evangelical 
covenant which God makes with his spiritual seed. 

20. That by baptism we are spiritually united to Christ. 

21. " By baptism we, who were by nature the children 
of wrath, are made the children of God." This is a fearful 
untruth. 

22. " By water, then, as a means — the water of baptism — 
we are regenerated or born again." This is as gross an 

'untruth as Rome ever taught, 



450 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

23. That baptism is called by the apostle " the washing 
of regeneration ;" and this is utterly false ; for the apostle 
does not allude to the rite of water baptism here, but to that 
washing to which the psalmist alludes — " Wash me thor- 
oughly from mine iniquities, and cleanse me from my sin." 
" Create within me a clean heart." " Purge me with hyssop, 
and I shall be clean; wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow." 

24. That in baptism " a principle of grace is infused." 
This is monstrous. 

25. " That in all ages the outward baptism is a means of 
the inward." This and the sentiment above is the doctrine 
of the great apostacy, i. e., salvation by the sacraments — 
grace infused into the sacraments. 

26. If infants are guilty of original sin [and they are], 
then they are the proper subjects of baptism ; seeing in the 
ordinary way they cannot be saved, unless this be washed 
away by baptism ! 

And thus, having plunged into the deepest quagmire of 
Rome, and in it laid the ground and reason of infant bap- 
tism. I leave it. Surely, what a mass of errors, and of the 
grossest kind and most pernicious character, and of the most 
popish cast, is taught in the baptism of an infant ! Is it a 
matter of astonishment that Baptists oppose it so strenuously, 
and for twelve centuries have suffered — poured forth their 
blood like water, and given their bodies to the rack and the 
stake, rather than baptize their infants in the name of God, 
and that, too, when they could have saved their lives by con- 
senting to the practice % Is it not more astonishing that 
every Baptist minister and member does not protest against 
the dogma with a thousand-fold more zeal and earnestness? 
Will they be considered faithful witnesses for Jesus while 
they allow such errors to be disseminated, with only a feeble 
and occasional rebuke ? 



LETTER XXXVII. 



The action of baptism — The Discipline acknowledges im- 
mersion as a scriptural act of Baptism — It is so admitted 
in the older standard works published by the Methodist 
" Book Concern' — Mr. Wesley admits immersion to have 
been the 'primitive action in his Journal, in his Notes on 
2V. T. — Adam Clark — Benson — And yet it is pronounced 
an unscriptural and indecent action in other ivorks published 
by the Book Concern, and by the whole Methodist press in 
the South — Admissions of two Presbyterians, two Catholics, 
and two Episcopalia?is. 

Dear Sir: — I wish briefly to call your attention to the 
contradictious teachings of your Church, touching the action 
of Christian baptism. I say the teachings of your Church ; 
because it is responsible for all the works written by your 
preachers, and published by your " Boole Concern." The 
Methodist press is solely and exclusively in the hands of the 
bishops and Conference. Every preacher is responsible to 
you for any obnoxious sentiment he may put forth in a 
book. — See Discipline. 

Every preacher or minister is obnoxious to exclusion, if he 
inveighs against the doctrines or Discipline of your Church — 
if he impugns or denies what is there allowed and recognized 
as right. It must be granted that every sentiment uttered, 
and every position taken by an author in a book published 

(451) 



452 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

by your Book Concern, is endorsed by your committee on 
publications, and unless censured by the Conference, if con- 
tinued to be published from year to year, is also approved 
and endorsed by the Church, which, we have seen, is com- 
posed of the bishops and travelling preachers. 

Your Church admits immersion of a subject in water to 
be as scriptural an action as the sprinkling or pouring of 
water upon him. 

Let the parents of every child to be baptized have the 
choice either of immersion, sprinkling or pouring. " He 
shall sprinkle or pour water upon it, or, if desired, immerse 
it in water.*' 

1st prayer, " And didst safely lead the children of Israel, 
thy people, through the Red Sea, figuring thereby the holy 
baptism." Sprinkling or pouring could not then be that holy 
baptism. 

" And by the baptism of thy well-beloved Son Jesus Christ 
in the river of Jordan." And yet no one was ever buried 
with Christ in baptism, by sprinkling. 

" Grant that the old Adam in this child may be so buried, 
that the new man may rise up in him." Here is an evident 
allusion to immersion, as there is in the catechism in denning 
the sacrament. 

In answer to the question, "What is the outward visible 
sign or form in baptism ? " we read " Water, wherein the per- 
son is baptized," &c. The Book of Common Prayer of the 
Church of England, from which this ritual was borrowed and 
amended, still warrants no other baptism but immersion, ex- 
cept in case the child is too sickly to bear it, when it may be 
poured. In all cases, where the child is poured upon, it under- 
stands that the health of the child precludes immersion. He 
(the minister) shall dip it (the child) in the water discreetly, 
or pour w r ater upon it. Again, "The minister may omit that 



CHRISTIANITY EETERSED. 453 

part of the above (alluding to the sign of the cross) which 
follows the immersion, or the pouring of water on the infant." 
In the "private baptism of infants," the direction is, "The 
minister shall pour water upon it." From what follows, viz., 
"If the child, which is after this sort baptized, do afterwards 
live," ive conclude that the direction about immersion is omitted 
on account of the state of the health of the child. 

Now what are the facts in the case 1 The old English 
Prayer-Book, in the time of Edward VI., acknowledges only 
one mode of baptism, viz., by immersion. 

Mr. Wesley frankly declares, that immersion was the 
primitive action of baptism. 

I refer first to his Journal of February 21, 1736 : "Mary 
Welch, aged eleven, was baptized, according to the custom of 
the first Church, and the rule of the Church of England, by 
immersion.' 1 '' 

He refused to sprinkle a Mr. Packer's child, because it was 
not weakly. " I was asked to baptize a child of Mr. Pack- 
er's, second bailiff of Savannah ; but Mrs. Packer told me, 
' Neither Mr. Packer nor I will consent to its being dipped.' 
I answered, ' If you certify that your child is weak, it will 
suffice (the rubric says) to pour water upon it.' She re- 
plied, ' Nay ; the child is not weak, but I am resolved it 
shall not be dipped.' This argument I could not confute ; so 
I went home, and the child was baptized by another person." 
—Journal, May 5. 

Mr. Wesley baptized adults by immersion. October 26, 
1739, he says, " I baptized Mr. Wiggington in the river, by 
Baptist Mills, and went on my way rejoicing to French and 
Cay." 

In his translation and notes of the New Testament, which 
he tells us in the preface was the last work of his life, in his 
comments on Rom. vi. 4 : " ; Buried with him by baptism? 



454 THE GKKAT IKON W 11KKL. 

&c, alluding to the ancient manner of baptizing by im- 
mersion." 

In his comments upon Col. ii. 12, he says, " The ancient 
manner of baptizing by immersion is as manifestly alluded 
to here, as the other manner of baptizing by sprinkling and 
pouring of water, in Heb. x. 22." Let it be noted that Wes- 
ley declares the apostle, in Romans and Colossians, mani- 
festly alluded to the action of immersion in baptism. Then 
did Mr. Wesley understand him to say in these two pas- 
sages, u Know ye not that so many of us [the apostles and 
the brethren at Rome] as have been immersed [Stuart] into 
Jesus Christ, have been immersed into his death? There- 
fore, we have been buried with him by immersion into 
death." In Col. ii. 12, " Buried with him [Christ] in immer- 
sion," &c. 

The apostles and the Christians at Rome and Colosse, to- 
gether with Christ, were confessedly immersed, when they 
were baptized ; and here we have undoubted scriptural au- 
thority of the most unquestionable character, that immer- 
sion was the only action for baptism, instituted by Christ, or 
known in the days of the apostles. He, then, who impugns 
this action impugns an institution of Christ ; and he who 
scoffs at it as indecent, casts reproach upon Christ, the apos- 
tles, and the apostolic Christians. But Wesley is not alone 
in this admission. Adam Clark, whose Commentaries are 
published by the Book Concern, on Rom. vi. 4, says, " ' We 
are buried,' &c. It is probable that the apostle here alludes 
to the mode of administering baptism by immersion [then, 
of course, that mode was practised in the apostles' time, and 
was the mode by which they, with Christ, were baptized], 
the whole body being put under the water, which seemed to 
say the man is drowned, as dead ; and as he came up out of 
the water, he seemed to have a resurrection to life — the man 



CHRISTIANITY RE VERSED. 455 

is risen again, he is alive ; and he was, therefore, supposed to 
throw off his old Gentile state, as he threw off his clothes, 
and to assume a new character, as the baptized generally put 
on a new or fresh garment. I say it is probable, that the 
apostle alludes to this mode -of immersion, "but it is not ab- 
solutely certain that he did so, as some do imagine; for, in 
the next verse, our being incorporated into Christ by bap- 
tism, is also denoted by our being planted, or rather grafted, 
together in the likeness of his death ; and Noah's ark, floating 
upon the water, and sprinkled by the rain from heaven, is a 
figure (1 Peter iii. 20, 21) ; but none of these gives us the 
same idea of the outward form as burying.''' 

On Col. ii. 12, he says, " ' Buried,' &c, alluding to the im- 
mersion practised in the case of adults, when the person 
appeared to be buried under the water, as Christ was buried 
in the heart of the earth ; his rising again the third day, and 
their emerging from the water, was an emblem of the res- 
urrection of the body, and then a total change of life." 

We find no fault with Mr. Clark, nor do we praise him for 
these comments. He was forced to make them ; the language 
of these scriptures will admit of no other possible consistent, 
honest interpretation. Mark well, Mr. Clark declares that 
adults, i. e., all adults, of course, were immersed in the days 
of Paul. The Scriptures nowhere intimate that any but 
believing adults were baptized ; and, therefore, we must con- 
clude, until we are shown the passage, that none but adults 
were baptized ; and, consequently, on Mr. Clark's hypothesis, 
that all who were baptized in those days were immersed. 

Benson's Commentaries are also published by the Book 
Concern. He says, " Rom. vi. 4, ; We are buried,' &c, allud- 
ing to the ancient manner of baptizing by immersion." Mr. 
Benson adds, " ' By baptism into death, that is, to engage us to 
die unto sin, and to carry on the mortification and death of it 



456 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

more and more." Then it is evident to my mind, that bap- 
tism was never designed for an unconscious infant, or an 
unregenerate person ; for none but those who are dead to sin 
have a right to be buried, to declare the fact, and baptism 
engages none to die, except those who profess a death unto sin. 

His comment on Col. ii. 12, is, "' Buried in baptism,' &c. 
The ancient manner of baptizing by immersion is as mani- 
festly alluded to here, as the other manner of baptizing by 
sprinkling and pouring of water in Heb. x. 22." 

How strikingly similar to Wesley's comment upon the 
same passage! That was a rare idea to drag in sprinkling 
and pouring by the hair of the head, because they were 
forced to confess without equivocation, that these passages 
manifestly alluded to immersion as the absolute baptism. 
The reader can easily satisfy himself that Heb. x. 22, has no 
possible allusion to Christian baptism, but simply to the 
ceremonial washings, which were immersions. — See Lev. 

Mr. Burkett's Commentaries are also published by the 
Book Concern. He says, on Rom. vi. 4, " We are buried." 
&c. : " The apostle alludes, no doubt, to the ancient manner 
of baptizing persons in those hot countries, which was by im- 
mersion, or putting them under water for a time, and then 
raising them up again out of the water, which rite had also 
a mystical signification, representing the burial of our old 
man sin in us, and our resurrection to newness of life. The 
metaphors, burying and rising again, do imply and intimate 
this much : burial implies a continuing unto death ; thus is 
mortification a continued act, a daily dying unto sin, and 
rising again supposes the person never more to be under the 
power of death." 

This is very frank, we confess. These admissions settle 
the whole question of the action of baptism. 

1. Thev teach us that Christ was immersed; and did he 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 457 

Hot command his disciples to the end of the dispensation, to ad- 
minister the rite by the same action he submitted to himself? 

2. These passages decide that the apostle Paul, at least, 
was immersed. 

3. They decide that all the Christians at Rome and 
Colosse, without exception, were immersed ; for it says, so 
many of them as had been baptized were buried with Christ 
in baptism. 

4. And they must decide the question in the mind of the 
impartial reader, that all the Christians baptized in the life- 
time of the apostles were undoubtedly baptized as the apostles 
had been. 

The point, then, is fairly settled. We have the highest 
authority in the Methodist Church admitting frankly, that 
immersion is scriptural baptism ; that it was the action ob- 
served, in the case of adults, in the days of Christ and his 
apostles ; and since they were all adults when they were 
baptized,, that Christ and his apostles were immersed ! I 
feel myself warranted to affirm, that Adam Clark admits that 
Christ and his apostles were immersed. 

Now, sir, is it credible that from the presses of that very 
9 Book Concern" books and tracts are poured forth in a cease- 
less, unabating flood, denying the admission of these very 
men, giving the falsehood to Wesley himself, and teaching 
that the Methodist Discipline recognizes an unscriptural 
and indecent action for scriptural baptism 1 Call you not 
this inveighing against the Discipline and established doc- 
trine of your Church 1 ? And yet you do not call these 
writers to account, but encourage them to preach and to 
write thus, by endorsing their books and publishing their 
sermons, and flooding the country with them. Where is 
your consistency % Where your authority 1 Where your 
sacred honor as men ? Where your plighted vows as bishops 1 
20 



458 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

Having given you the teachings of your Discipline, and 
of your oldest standard writers, I will submit a few speci- 
mens of the opposite teachings in works daily issued, side by 
side, and sent over the Union in the same boxes and pack- 
ages with the above. 

In Tract No, 99, p. 5 : "' Except a man be born of water 
and of the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.' 
(John iii. 5). Water here means the doctrines of the Gospel, 
or word of God, which is the instrumental cause of regener- 
ation/' 

Will the reader refer to my last letter, and see how this 
palpably contradicts the express and universal teachings of 
the Discipline, that the water here is the literal water of bap- 
tism ? 

What have infants to do with baptism according to the 
Discipline, if the water here means the water of God 1 And 
yet the teachings of this tract are endorsed and sent out side 
by side with the Discipline ! 

" Thus, you see the Spirit, the water, and the blood agree 
in one fact — purification ; one mode — sprinkling." — P. 8. 

"Can they [the Baptists] remain insensible to our plea 
when we seriously inquire ' w T hat right have they to adopt 
a mode which contradicts God's witnesses in earth, and ex- 
cludes the pious from the Lord's table V In looking at the 
testimony of the Spirit, and the water, and the blood, I could 
never imagine how they [the Baptists] first invented the idea 
of immersion." — P. 9. 

I, too, might ask in reply, if I had designed any replication 
in this letter, what right has the Discipline, or the writer's 
Church, to endorse a mode as scriptural which " contradicts 
God's witnesses in earth ?" As to when Baptists first in- 
vented the idea of immersion, perhaps Mr. Wesley, Lord 
King, Adam Clark, or Benson may have invented it for them. 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 459 

and may be the inventor found it out in the Bible, where 
thousands of Methodists are finding it every year ! 

"We come to the conclusion of this matter : There is one 
Lord and one faith and one baptism, and the three that bear 
witness in earth agree on one mode of administration — sprink- 
ling."— P. 11. 

" We do not infer from what has been said, that those who 
practise immersion are unchristian people, because they sub- 
mit to an absurdity instead of a Christian ordinance." — P. 11. 

Is not this inveighing against the Discipline, and the doc- 
trines of the Church, as taught by Wesley, Clark, and Ben- 
son ? Does the Discipline teach an absurdity % and is this 
slander upon the Discipline and Wesley printed by the Book 
Concern, and sent out with the Discipline, and the writings 
of Clark and Wesley 1 

" We feel constrained to reprove some of our brethren 
who use the water of purification correctly themselves, yet 
seem to admit the propriety of immersion." — P. 11. Are not 
the brethren he reproves, Wesley, Clark, and Benson % 

u It is plainly impossible that an ordinance of divine ap- 
pointment can be administered correctly in two modes so 
wholly different. Instead of giving countenance to a mode 
of administration which differs so widely from the testimony 
of God's witnesses on earth, they ought to act the benevolent 
part of expounding the way of God more perfectly. (Acts 
xviii. 29.)" — P.ll. This is pure Baptist doctrine. According 
to this writer, and it is no less a name than " Rev. J. L.Wil- 
son, Doctor of Methodist Divinity," there is, and can be, but 
one scriptural mode, and that is sprinkling. Pouring water 
upon the face, head, or the back side of the head, as well as 
immersion, is an " absurdity ;" for it is plainly impossible 
that an ordinance of divine appointment can be administer- 
ed correctlv in two modes so wholly different as sprinkling 



<±60 THE GREAT 1K0IS T WHEEL. 

and pouring ! What follows ? All those Methodists — and 
there are thousands — who have been either poured upon or im- 
mersed, have not received a " Christian ordinance," but an ab- 
surdity, and are still unbaptized, the Discipline, and Wesley, 
and Benson, and Clark, to the contrary notwithstanding ! 
And will Mr. Wilson, D.D., invite such unbaptized trans- 
gressors to his communion ? I must dismiss this tract. 

Tract 337, in commenting upon Rom. vi. 4, and Col. ii. 12 : 
"It does not appear that the apostle designed any allusion to 
the mode of baptism. That he did, is by some advocates for 
immersion assumed without the least shadow of proof. "-P.31. 

This tract, duly endorsed, goes out with Wesley's Notes, 
and Clark's and Benson's Commentaries ! How respectful 
to the scholarship and judgment of those men! 

Tract. 180. In this it is asserted that immersion " is so 
revolting to our delicacy in these times, that we cannot but 
think immersion is an innovation?' temporal O mores I 

Tract No. 188 : " The practice of immersion is indecent." 
And " we" can but think the indecency is in him who thinks 
thus. Again, 

Immersion " makes those who are clean every whit ap- 
pear more like objects of grief" &c. The idea of immer- 
sion is to me exceedingly dreadful. 

Tract No. 153, by "Rev." Richard W^atson. After attempt- 
ing to show immersion without scriptural authority, he says, 
" Finally, it is, most of all, improbable that a religion like 
the Christian, so scrupulously delicate, should have enjoined 
the immersion of women by men, and in the presence of 
men." 

" With all the arrangements of modern time, baptism by 
immersion is not a decent practice ; there is not a female, 
perhaps, who submits to it, who has not a great previous 
struggle with her delicacy.' ' 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 461 

The tract of this most super- sensitive and hyper-delicate 
divine is closed and clenched by a foot-note by the editing 
committee of the Book Concern, who delicately pronounce 
immersion a sin.* 

And this, too, is sent out with the Discipline, declaring that 
the Methodist Church encourages and gives licence to com- 
mit sin, and more, commands the preacher to be partaker of 
it whenever a person chooses to be immersed ! and more, to 
commit this sin in the name of the Father, and of the Son, 
and of the Holy Ghost, and pronounce the " indecent," the 
" revolting," the sinful practice, both lawful and scriptural 
baptism ! 

And yet Dr. Thomas 0. Summers, of the Methodist Epis- 
copal Church, says, " Immersion is valid, in spile of theplung- 
ing, and not in consequence of it. It is a mangling of the 
Saviour's ordinance. We may, indeed, in special cases, and 
in condescension to weak consciences, administer the ordinance 
by plunging." — Pages 122, 123. Here it is evident that he 
would administer immersion, not that the Bible teaches it. 



* '• Baptism, as an emblem, points out : 1. The washing away of the 
guilt and and pollution of sin. 2. The pouring out of the Holy Spirit. 
In Scripture it is made an emblem of these two, and of these only. 
Some of the superstitions above alluded to sin therefore by excess ; 
but immersion sins by defect. It retains the emblematical character 
of the rite as to the washing away of sin ; but it loses it entirely as 
to the gift of the Holy Ghost ; and, beyond the washing away of sin, is 
an emblem of nothing for which we have any scriptural authority to 
make it emblematical. Immersion, therefore, as distinct from every 
other mode of applying water to the body, means nothing. To say 
that it figures our spiritual death and resurrection, has, we have seen, 
no authority from the texts used to prove it ; and to make a sudden 
pop under water to be emblematical of burial, is as far-fetched a cou- 
I ceit as any which adorns the Emblems of Quarles, without any por- 
tion of the ingenuity." 



462 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

but because of religious prejudices, and in condescension to 
iveak consciences ; and yet do it in the name of the Trinity ! 

Dr. Lee, of the Richmond Methodist Advocate* openly 
avows immersion an indecent and disgustful performance, 
and he, 1 suppose, will administer it to weak consciences and 
to persons whose tastes and predilections are indelicate and 
disgraceful ! It is a noticeable fact that the majority of the 
Conference editors in the South, as well as the authors and 
hading preachers, now advocate the views of Richard Watson. 

Now, sir, do not understand me as complaining, but as- 
tonished. I read in the Holy Book that there shall come in 
the last days scoffers, and those by reason of whom the way 
of truth shall be evil spoken of; but, sir, I am amazed that, 
in the face of your Book of Discipline, you will allow your 
preachers, your authors, and your editors to write and pub- 
lish with impunity such sentiments, inveighing,as they so mani- 
festly do, against it and your doctrines. I am astonished that 
you will, from year to year, issue from your Book Concern — 
the exponent of the doctrines and teachings of your Church — 
such contradictious publications, and endorse them by so 
doing as equally correct and scriptural ! Surely public at- 
tention will ere long be awakened to the questionable mo- 
rality of your proceedings. I am willing for you to eschew 
the practice of immersion ; I am exceedingly anxious for you 
to do so, and have labored, and preached, and written, and 
I believe not wholly in vain, to force you to relinquish the 
practice. You have no right to it as a Church ordinance. 
You profane it. You mislead thousands of Christians, and 
entangle them in your societies by it. I entreat of you, have 
no more to do with it ; it is an ordinance of the Church of 
God, and not of Mr. Wesley's, or any human organization. 
You have no more right to it than has an Odd Fellows' or 
Masonic Lodge, or a mere Bible or Tract Society. Pour- 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 463 

ings and sprinklings, and seekership, and probation, and in- 
fant rites, and all such like traditions of men are the proper 
institutions for observance in your societies, which are them- 
selves the institutions of men, and ruled exclusively by men. 

The world expects that you will harmonize your publica- 
tions, and then make your practice square with your teach- 
ings, if you demand its respect and confidence. And does it 
ask too much 1 

I cannot forbear closing tnis letter with quotations from 
the writings of two of the first scholars and historians in 
the Pedobaptist world, in order to sustain Wesley and Clark 
against the slanderous imputations cast upon them by cir- 
cuit-riders of the present day. 

Moses Stuart, late Professor of Theology at Andover, 
and a Presbyterian : — 

" Bcltttg) and (3aTcrl^o) mean to dip, plunge, or immerge 
into any liquid. All lexicographers of any note are agreed 
in this." — P. 51, new edition. 

" The word parrTi^G) means to overwhelm, literally and 
figuratively, in a variety of ways." 

" The passages which refer to immersion are so numerous in 
the fathers that it would take a volume merely to recite them." 

"But enough. 'It is,' says Augusti (Denker vii. p. 216), 
' a thing made out./ viz., the ancient practice of immersion. 
So, indeed, all the writers who have thoroughly investigated this 
subject conclude. I know of no one usage of ancient times 
which seems to be more clearly and certainly made out. I 
cannot see how it is possible for any candid man who exam- 
ines the subject to deny this." 

" The mode of baptism by immersion, the Oriental 
Church \i. e., Greek] has always continued to preserve, 
even down to the present time. The members of this 
Church are accustomed to call the members of the West- 



464 THE GREAT IRON" YVHEKL. 

era Church [i. e., Church of Rome] sprinkled Christians, by 
way of ridicule and contempt. They [the Greeks] maintain 
that ftanTi^G) can mean nothing but immerge ; and that bap- 
tism by sprinkling is as great a solecism as immersion by asper- 
sion, and they claim to themselves the honor of having pre- 
served the ancient sacred rite of the Church free from change 
and from corruption, which would destroy its significancy." 

" F. Brenner, a Roman Catholic writer, has recently pub- 
lished a learned work which contains a copious history of 
usages in respect to the baptismal rite. He says, — 

" ' Thirteen hundred years was baptism generally and ordi- 
narily performed by the immersion of a man under water ; 
and only in extraordinary cases was sprinkling or affusion 
permitted. These latter methods of baptism were called in 
question, and even prohibited.'' 

" ' In the work of John Floyer, on Cold Bathing, p. 50, it 
is mentioned, that the English Church practised immersion 
down to the beginning of the seventeenth centurjf; when a 
change to the method of sprinkling gradually took place. 
As a confirmation of this, it may be mentioned that the 
first Liturgy, in 1547, enjoins a trine immersion, in case the 
child is not sickly.' 

"We have collected facts enough to authorize us now to 
come to the following general conclusion respecting the 
practice of the Christian Church In general, with regard to 
the mode of baptism, viz., that from the earliest ages of 
which we have any account, subsequent to the apostolic age 
and downward for several centuries, the churches did gener- 
ally practise baptism by immersion ; perhaps by immersion 
of the whole person; and that the only exceptions to this 
mode which were usually allowed, were in cases of urgent 
sickness or other cases of immediate and imminent danger, 
where immersion could not be practised. 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 465 

" It may also be mentioned here, that aspersion and a fu- 
sion, which had in particular cases been now and then prac- 
tised in primitive times, were gradually introduced. These 
became at length, as we shall see hereafter, quite common, 
and in the Western Church almost universal, some time be- 
fore the Reformation. 

" In what manner, then, did the churches of Christ from a 
very early period, to say the least, understand the word 
(3a7TTi%G) in the New Testament 1 Plainly they construed 
it as meaning immersion. They sometimes even went so far 
as to forbid any other method of administering the ordinance, 
cases of necessity and mercy only excepted." 

Dr. Parmley, of New York, writes to Prof. Anthon, of 
Columbia College, N. Y., that Dr. Spring, a Pedobaptist 
minister, declared to him that in the original, the word jBarc- 
ri^G) had no definite or distinct meaning ; that it means to 
immerse, sprinkle, pour, and a variety of other meanings. 

Prof. Anthon replied : — 

"There is no authority whatever for the singular remark 
made by the Rev. Dr. Spring, relative to the force of pann^o). 
The primary meaning of the word is to dip, or immerse • 
and its secondary meanings, if ever it had any, all refer, in 
some way or other, to the same leading idea. Sprinkling, 
&c, are entirely out of the question." 

This is the testimony of the first living scholar of England 
or America. 

Dr. Wall, a learned Episcopalian, in his History of In- 
fant Baptism : " And for sprinkling, properly so called, it 
seems it was at 1645 just then beginning and used by very 
few. It must have begun in the disorderly times after 1641, 
for Mr. Blake [who lived in England in 1644] had never 
used it, nor seen it used." 
20* 



466 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

" So (parallel to the rest of their reformations) they re- 
formed the font into a basin. This learned assembly could 
not remember that fonts to baptize in had been always 
used by the primitive Christians, long before the beginning 
of popery, and ever since churches were built ; but that 
sprinkling for the common use of baptizing was really in- 
troduced (in France first, and then in the other popish coun- 
tries) in times of popery ; and that accordingly all those 
countries in which the usurped power of the Pope is, or has 
formerly been, owned, have left off dipping of children 
in the font ; but that all other countries in the world (which 
had never regarded his authority) do still use it." Sprinkling 
is then manifestly one of the traditions of the Pope of Rome. 

But Dr. Wall says, " Their [the apostolic and primitive 
churches'] general and ordinary way was to baptize by im- 
mersion, or dipping the person, whether it were an infant or 
grown man or woman, into the water. This is so plain 
and clear by an infinite number of passages, that, as one 
cannot but pity the weak endeavors of such Pedobaptists 
as would maintain the negative of it, so also we ought to 
disown and show a dislike of the profane scoffs which some 
people give to the English Antipedobaptists merely for their 
use of dipping. It is one thing to maintain that that cir- 
cumstance is not absolutely necessary to the essence of bap- 
tism, and another, to go about to represent it as ridiculous 
and foolish, or as shameful and indecent ; when it was in all 
probability the way by which our blessed Saviour, and for 
certain was the most usual and ordinary way by which the 
ancient Christians, did receive their baptism. I shall not 
stay to produce the particular proofs of this. Many of the 
quotations which I brought for other purposes, and shall 
bring, do evince it. It is a great want of prudence, as well 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 467 

as of honesty, to refuse to grant to an adversary what is 
certainly true, and may be proved so. It creates a jeal- 
ousy of all the rest that one says." — Vol. ii. p. 384. 

I add to this the highest Roman Catholic authority in the 
world, that of Mons. Bossuet, Bishop of Meaux, who was 
preceptor to one of the kings of France, and the frank conces- 
sion to that authority by the learned Mons. de la Roque, pastor 
of a Reformed Church at Roan, in Normandy, who was en- 
gaged in controversy with Bishop Bossuet. Bossuet says, — 
.''In fine, w r e read not in the Scripture that baptism was 
otherwise administered ; and we are able to make it appear 
by the acts of councils, and by the ancient rituals, that for 
thirteen hundred years baptism was thus administered 
throughout the whole Church, as far as was possible. 
• " The very word used in the rituals to express the action 
of the godfathers and godmothers, saying, they lift up the 
child from the baptismal font, is sufficient to show that the 
child was plunged in it. 

" Though these are incontestable truths, yet neither we 
nor those of the pretended reformed religion hearken to the 
Anabaptists, who hold mersion to be essential and indispens- 
able ; nor have either they or w r e feared to change this dip- 
ping (as I may say) of the whole body, into a bare asper- 
sion or infusion on one part of it. No other reason of this 
alteration can be rendered, than that this dipping is not of 
the substance of baptism ; and those of the pretended re- 
formed religion agreeing with us in this, the first principle 
we have laid down is incontestable." 

And in another place, "Jesus Christ (says he) has ordered 
to dip, as we have often observed. We have also taken 
notice, that he was baptized in this form, that his apostles 
practised it, and that it was continued in the Church down 
to the twelfth and thirteenth ages ; and yet baptism given 



468 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

only by infusion is admitted, without any difficulty, on the 
sole authority of the Church." 

" Experience has shown that all the attempts of the reform- 
ed to confound the Anabaptists by the Scripture, have been 
weak; and therefore they are at last obliged to allege to them 
the practice of the Church. We see in their Discipline, at the 
end of the eleventh chapter, the form of receiving adult 
persons into their communion, where they make the pros- 
elyted Anabaptist acknowledge that the baptism of infants 
is founded on Scri])tu?'e, and on the perpetual practice of the 
Church. When the pretended reformed believe they have 
the word of God very expressly on their side, they are not 
wont to build on the perpetual practice of the Church. But 
in this case, because the Scripture furnishes them with no- 
thing by which they are able to stop the mouths of the Ana- 
baptists, it was necessary to rely on somewhat else, and at 
the same time to confess that in these matters the per- 
petual practice of the Church is of inviolable authority." 

What reply did the Reformed pastor make to this au- 
thority'? Did he deny that Christ commanded his disciples 
to immerse, and not to sprinkle ? Did he deny that it had 
been the practice for thirteen centuries 1 Did he deny that 
the Romish Church had upon her sole authority changed the 
action into sprinkling ? No ; he denies not one of the above 
statements, but frankly admits every one of them, and 
charges the Romish Church with having corrupted the ordi- 
nances by so doing. Hear him : 

After having recited Mons. Bossuet's words, which prove 
immersion to have been the ancient and proper way of bap- 
tizing : " I add (says he) to these reasons of Mons. Bossuet, 
that baptism is an external mark that we are willing to 
die to sin and to the world, and to have part in the death 
and burial of Jesus Christ. St. Paul says, we are buried 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED, 469 

with him by baptism, which shows that the believer was 
plunged in water, thereby, to represent, as it were, a sort of 
death and burial. I further observe, that St. Paul calls it 
by a name which properly signifies a bath (or laver), (Tit. 
iii. 5,) when he says, God has saved us by the laver of regen- 
eration." lie at length repeats what the bishop urges against 
the Protestants concerning the change of dipping into sprink- 
ling, &c„ in which they agree with those of the Romish 
Church, and then answers in the following terms : "I was 
willing (says he) to report this whole passage of Mons. Bos- 
suet, to elucidate this matter to the Protestants, w r ho scarce 
ever make any reflection on it. It is true, that the greatest 
part of them hitherto baptize only by sprinkling, but it is 
certainly an abuse ; and this practice, which they have re- 
tained from the Romish Church, without a due examination 
of it, as well as many other things which they still retain, 
renders their baptism very defective. It corrupts both the 
institution and ancient usage of it, and the relation it ought 
to have to faith, repentance and regeneration. Monsieur 
Bossuet's remark, that dipping was in use for thirteen 
hundred years, deserves our serious consideration, and our 
acknowledgment thereupon, that we have not sufficiently 
examined all that we have retained from the Romish Church ; 
that, seeing her most learned prelates now inform us that 
it was she that first abolished a usage authorized by so many 
strong reasons, and by so many ages, she has done very ill 
on this occasion, and that we are obliged to return to the 
ancient practice of the Church, and to the institution of Jesus 
Christ. I clo not say that baptism by aspersion is null — that 
is not my opinion : but it must be confessed, if sprinkling de- 
stroys not the substance of baptism, yet it alters it, and in 
some sort corrupts it—'tis a defect which spoils its lawful 
form." — Stennefs Answer to Russen, p. 186. 



LETTER XXXVIII 



The Methodists terms of communion — None so dose, or so 
unscripturally close — They invert the ordinances and violate 
the divine order — The Discipline forbids Methodist preacha s 
to invite members of other denominations — All who com- 
mune with Methodists must not only believe, but dress like 
them ; — Close communion in marrying — In trading, in Sab- 
bath-Schools, in Singing- Schools, and "Tune-Books" — Bap- 
tist communion not close — The testimony of Mr. Bibbard. 

Dear Sir : — The preachers of no denomination are so 
clamorous upon the subject of communion as yours. Baptist 
"close communion" — Baptist illiberality and bigotry are 
the favorite themes of your ministers, upon all public and 
private occasions, when they think an impression can be 
made ; and especially at their communion seasons, or after 
a revival of religious feeling in any town or community, 
they do not fail to extend a kind and urgent invitation to 
their " dear Baptist brethren whom they love so well," to 
come and sit down with them around the table of the Lord, 
&c. This, to the unreflecting, seems very liberal and Christ- 
ian-like. But when their dear brethren refuse, they pour upon 
them a flood of abuse, for their selfishness, their unchristian 
feelings, their bigotry and narrow contractedness, and suc- 
ceed in very many instances in effectually souring the minds 
of Christians and the world, and arousing feelings of con- 
tempt and even hatred against Baptists. Now, sir, I wish 

(470) 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 471 

to put a full stop to this wicked course of procedure on the 
part of your preachers, and this I shall succeed in effecting, 
provided I can influence either the bishops of the Methodist 
Episcopal Church, or the ministers and members of Baptist 
churches, to discharge their duty. 

I shall show, 1st, That those Methodist ministers who 
extend such general invitations to Baptists to commune with 
them, transgress the explicit law and rule laid down in the 
Discipline for the administration of the Lord's Supper. 2d, 
That they violate their, own solemn pledges and oaths when- 
ever they do so. 3d, That they fly directly in the face of 
the express command of their own bishop, whom they have 
sworn " reverently to obey," in all things. 4th, That 
Methodist communion is not only unscriptural ly close, but 
the most strict of any in professed Christendom. And 5th, 
and finally, will prove by Mr. Hibbard, that Methodists are 
guilty of an open violation of the commission and command 
of Christ in their observance of the Lord's Supper. 

I. All those Methodist ministers who give general invi- 
tations to Baptists and others to commune with them, trans- 
gress the law of the Discipline, which they have sworn 
religiously to observe. 

Read the law of Conference, in its statute-book, touching 
the Supper. 

"Section II. — General Directions. 

" Q. Are there any directions to be given concerning the 
administration of the Lord's Supper? 

U A. 1. Let those who have scrupl.es concerning the receiv- 
ing of it kneeling, be permitted to receive it either standing 
or sitting. 

" 2. Let no person who is not a member of our Church be 
admitted to the communion without examination, and some 
token given by an elder or deacon. 



472 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

" 3. No person shall be admitted to the Lord's Supper 
among us who is guilty of any practice for which we would 
exclude a member of our Church."* 

For what is this examination, unless it be to shut out all 
those, whether Baptists or Presbyterians, who are guilty of 
any practice for which one of your own members would be 
excluded, as the third rule intimates'? 

The question then arises, for what practices would you ex- 
clude one of your own members 1 

1. For refusing to attend the class -meetings. 

"Q. 3. What shall we do with those members of our 
Church who wilfully and repeatedly neglect to meet their 
class % 

"A. 1. Let the elder, deacon, or one of the preachers, visit 
them, whenever it is practicable, and explain to them the 
consequence if they continue to neglect, namely, exclusion. 

"2. If they do not amend, let him who has the charge of 
the circuit or station bring their case before the society, or 
a select number, before whom they shall have been cited to 
appear; and if they be found guilty of wilful neglect by a 
decision of a majority of the members before whom their 
case is brought, let them be laid aside, and let the preacher, 
show that they are excluded for a breach of our rules, and 
not for immoral conduct." 

Now, suppose a member whom you have excluded for re- 
fusing to obey this human law, should join the Baptists or 
Presbyterians, and, hearing one of the liberal invitations of I 
your preachers, should come forward, can he get a " token," L 
if your ministers observe this law, as they have pledged them- 
selves to do'? Certainly not ; all such Baptists or Presby- 
terians or Episcopalians are shut out. 



Discipline, p. 77, edition 1847. 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 473 

2. For inveighing against either the doctrines or Discipline 
of the Methodist Episcopal Church. 

" If a member of our Church shall be clearly convicted 
of endeavoring to sow dissensions in any of our societies, by 
inveighing against either our doctrines or Discipline, such 
person so offending shall be first reproved by the senior 
minister or preacher of his circuit, and if he persist in such 
pernicious practices, he shall be expelled from the Church. 

Can Episcopalians, Presbyterians, or Baptists, then, get a 
token from an elder or deacon, if he keeps his solemn oath 
to observe the directions of the Discipline? Do not all 
Episcopalians regard and declare the Episcopacy of your 
Church, as a "sham Episcopacy," and your sect as a mis- 
chievous schism? Do not all Presbyterians hold, teach, 
preach, and declare, publicly and privately, that the govern- 
ment of Methodism is unscriptural, anti-republican, and m 
all its tendencies dangerous to the republicanism of this 
country, and equally to be feared with Romanism 1 Do 
they not also declare that your penance of Friday fasts, your 
class and band-meetings are popish, unscriptural and perni- 
cious in their influence'? Do they not openly pronounce 
your doctrinal views as Arminian, and therefore utterly sub- 
versive of the true grace of God and the plan of salvation 
by grace, and eminently dangerous to the souls of men ? 
Do they not declare that your seekership and "probation," 
and your admitting confessedly unregenerate seekers to the 
communion, are also unscriptural and of evil tendency 1 Do 
they not everywhere " sow dissensions," by declaring that the 
Romish dogma of baptismal regeneration is openly taught 
in your office for baptism, and in the works of Mr. Wesley, 
which you still continue to issue with your endorsement 
from the Book Concern? And do not Baptists not only 
agree with all the above objections of Presbyterians, but 



474 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

constantly and everywhere, at home and abroad, on the land, 
on the sea, from the pulpit and the press, upon the high- way 
and in the by-way, by the way-side and the fire-side, declare 
that by your form of government you dethrone Jesus Christ, 
reject his sole and supreme authority to rule in and over 
his churches, — that your bishops and preachers assume to 
themselves the impious prerogatives of antichrist, and as- 
sume the throne of Christ as kings in Zion ? Do not Bap- 
tists assert that you have corrupted the membership of the 
churches of Christ (granting that your societies are churches, 
of Christ) by the introduction of infants, of children, and of 
seekers; and that the main part and pillar of popery is the 
main part and pillar of Methodism — infant baptism 1 ? and, by 
word and deed, do not Baptists (as they should) refuse to ac- 
cept your ordinances, your baptisms and ordinations, as scrip- 
tural or valid, and publicly refuse to recognize your societies 
as churches of Christ or branches of his Church'? Now, 
these facts are well known to you, and to all your minis- 
ters who know any thing ; and will they, in the face of these, 
and in the face of the inviolable directions of your Dis- 
cipline, invite Presbyterians and Baptists to their table ? 
Are we not guilty of inveighing against your doctrines and 
Discipline — of "sowing dissensions" i. e., disaffection to your 
doctrines and practices, among your members % Are we 
not guilty of practices for which you w r ould exclude a mem- 
ber of one of your societies % And could a soul of us all 
get a ticket to your table, if your law was executed % 

You sometimes, for a show of liberality, invite our minis- 
ters and Presbyterian ministers, to preach with you — to 
hold union meetings with you ; but can you invite them to 
eat with you, without an open violation of your solemn vows, 
before God and men, to your chief ministers 1 Let us suppose 
that our ministers are an exception to £he above law — are 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 475 

they not swept from the Methodist table by another % It 
must be granted, that, according to the spirit of the Disci- 
pline, the minister of no denomination should be invited, 
who is guilty of practices for which you would exclude a 
Methodist preacher. Very well ; for what practices would 
you exclude the best of your own preachers? What savs 
the book of Methodist laws ? 

" Q. 4. What shall be clone with those ministers or preach- 
ers who hold and disseminate, publicly or privately, doc- 
trines which are contrary to our articles of religion? 

* A. Let the same process be observed as in case of gross 
immorality : but if the minister or preacher so offending do 
solemnly engage not to disseminate such erroneous doctrines 
in public or in private, he shall be borne with, till his case 
be laid before the next Annual Conference, which shall de- 
termine the matter." 

Will not all Presbyterian and Baptist preachers glory to 
plead " guilty" upon this count ? How then can one of 
them get a ''ticket" to your table? Then you, too, are 
guilty of getting our ministers to preach for you, and yet 
refuse to let them eat with you ! ! 

But who else cannot get " tickets" to your open commu- 
nion table ? 

3. "Those who wear high heads, enormous bonnets, or ruffles, 
or ringsP 

That I speak according to the law of Methodism, judge 
thou : 

"Of Dress. 

<; Q. Should we insist on the rules concerning dress ? 

" A. By all means. This is no time to give encourage- 
ment to superfluity of apparel. Therefore receive none into 
the Church till they have left off superfluous ornaments. In 
rder to this, 1. Let^ every one who has charge of a circuit 



Gl 



476 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

or station, read Mr. Wesley's Thoughts upon Dress, at least 
once a year, in every society. 2. In visiting the classes be 
very mild, but very strict. 3. Allow of no exempt case : 
better one suffer than many. *4. Give no tickets to any that 
wear high heads, enormous bonnets, ruffles, or rings" 

There may be some Presbyterians, and Baptists, too, who 
are so exceedingly charitable as to have no particular princi- 
ples in religious matters, and think and say that Methodist 
doctrines and practices are all right for Methodists, provided 
they are sincere in believing them ; or, if they have princi- 
ples, they are so generously consistent as to compromise 
them, and these characters might possibly pass the examina- 
tion so far. But then, these very persons are apt to carry 
their heads rather high, as they generally think they are bet- 
ter, more catholic and liberal, than their brethren ; and I have 
known some of them wear a ring on their little finger, and 
sometimes a ruffle in their shirt-bosom. But the ladies, we 
know, generally believe strongly in the latest fashion, just in 
proportion as they are indifferent to the principles and con- 
sistencies of religion. If it is the fashion to wear " enormous 
bonnets," they will wear such : or, if very little, and those 
worn more upon the neck and shoulders, they will wear such, 
and so wear them. If it is fashionable to wear many or few 
ruffles and flounces, they will dress accordingly ; and as to 
"rings," they, of all Christians, are guilty of the greatest ex- 
travagance. Can these characters get a " ticket " if the elder 
or deacon conscientiously keep his pledge to observe the 
directions of the Discipline, and the commands of his 
chief ministers % By no means. 

Is it urged that these directions concerning dress do not 
apply to the communion, but only to joining the society ? 
I answer, if they debar from the Church, they also shut out 
from the Lord's table, according to the third rule above 



CHRISTIAN JTY REVERSED. 477 

quoted : " No person shall be admitted to the Lord's Sup- 
per among us who is guilty of any practice for which we 
would exclude a member of our Church /" 

The members of the Methodist Church are to be excluded 
from the Supper if guilty of a violation of the law concern- 
ing dress, and consequently, the members of all other denom- 
inations. This is clear and unquestionable. 

Elder S. Remington, who was for a long time a Methodist 
preacher, in his little work, "A Defence of Restricted Com- 
munion," has very kindly initiated us into all the minutiae of 
this examination : 

"On page 104 of their Book of Discipline, 1850, it is 
asked : ' Quest. Are there any directions to be given concern- 
ing the administration of the Lord's Supper V In the second 
article of the answer, we have the following : 'No person 
shall be admitted to the Lord's Supper among us, who is 
guilty of any practice for which we would exclude a mem- 
ber of our Church.' 

" We will suppose a minister of another Church applies to 
an elder for admission to the Lord's Supper. The elder 
looks at him, and says, 'You are very plain in your dress, 
and as far as your appearance is concerned, I can admit you ; 
but 1 must examine you as to your practice.' He then takes 
the Book of Discipline and reads on page 86, section i., ques- 
tion 4, ' What shall be done with those ministers or preach- 
ers who hold and disseminate, publicly or privately, doctrines 
which are contrary to our articles of religion ? Ans. Let the 
same process be observed as in case of gross immorality.' 
'Now,' says the elder, 'I would inquire, are you with us in 
doctrine V ' No, sir, I am not,' replies the applicant. ' I 
believe,' continues he, ' in the doctrine of personal and eter- 
nal predestination and foreordination, as set forth in the 
Presbyterian Confession of Faith, pp. 15-19 ; and I accord- 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 479 

that the terms of communion with you are simply these — 
we must believe, preach, and dress just like the Methodists. 
If I mistake not, that is going a little ahead of the Baptists. 
For Baptists will allow their members and ministers to dif- 
fer on some theological points, and yet not refuse to fellow- 
ship them at the Lord's table. Permit me, then, my dear 
friend, to suggest that, instead of crying out against the Bap- 
tists for their close communion, boasting at the same time of 
your open communion, you lay your hand upon your mouth 
until you alter your Discipline, striking out the restrictions 
which render your Church more restricted in her commun- 
ion than even that Church which we Pedobaptists all agree 
to censure for its practical want of catholicity.' 

"Finally, it can be shown from the Discipline of the Meth- 
odist E. Church, that it is as strictly close communion as 
any Baptist Church in the land. Page 74, section ii., ques- 
tion 4, it is asked, ' What shall we do with those members 
of our Church who wilfully and repeatedly neglect to meet 
their class? A. 1. Let the elder, deacon, or one of the 
preachers, visit them, whenever it is practicable, and explain 
to them the consequence if they continue to neglect, viz., 
exclusion. 2. If they do not amend, let him who has charge 
of the circuit or station bring their case before the society, 
or a select number, before whom they shall have been cited 
to appear ; and if they be found guilty of wilful neglect by 
the decision of a majority of the members before whom their 
case is brought, let them be laid aside, and let the preacher 
show that they are excluded for a breach of our rules, and 
not for immoral conduct.' 

" From the above laws of the Methodist E. Church, we ob- 
serve that non-attendance upon class, without any immorality, 
is sufficient to exclude a person from the Church. Now, sup- 
pose this excluded person, who may be in every other sense 



4:80 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

a worthy member,- should join another evangelical Church — 
nothing against his moral character ; no one doubts his piety ; 
not even the Methodists doubt his sincerity — and that he 
is a man of genuine religion. All that can be said of him 
is, ' he will not attend class.' Well, now he comes back to 
the Church from which he has been excluded, and presents 
himself as a member of another Church, in good and regular 
standing, for admittance to the Lord's table. Says the 
elder, 'My friend, I cannot admit you.' 'Why not 1 ?' asks 
the brother ; ' do you not believe that I am a Christian, and 
that I am bound with you, as such, to a better land % And 
do you not rejoice with me in the hope of sitting down to- 
gether at the marriage-supper of the Lamb V ' O yes, my 
brother,' responds the elder ; ' I must inquire (perhaps I am 
a little too fast) — are you truly sorry that you did not comply 
with the rules of the Church and attend class 1 ?' 'I am not 
sorry, my brother,' he responds, ' for I did not then, neither 
do I now, believe in class-meetings.' ' Well, then, I must 
read you the law,' replies the elder. ' Page 96, section iv., 
article 5 : "After such forms of trial and expulsion, such 
person shall have no privilege of society or of sacraments 
in our Church without contrition, confession, and proper 
trial." Now, if you are not penitent, as I perceive you are 
not, you see that you cannot be admitted to the Lord's table 
with us.' He answers, ' I have only to say, my dear brother, 
as I have not violated any of the laws of Jesus Christ, I did 
not know but you might deem it proper to allow me to sit 
down occasionally with my old brethren at the Lord's table. 5 
' It is true,' replies the elder, ' I do not charge you with any 
direct violation of the laws of Christ, but you have broken 
or refused to yield obedience to the laws of our Church, and 
that is sufficient to shut you away from the table.' ' Why, 
elder, the Baptist would not do that thing. They shut the 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 481 

door, they say, because we will not obey Christ. And there 
seems to be some good reason in that ; but you admit that 
I am not excluded for disobedience to Christ, but to your 
Church. Has your Church a power to make laws, and bind 
them upon its members, that Christ never made, and then 
for non-obedience to exclude a genuine Christian, and treat 
him as a heathen and a publican 1 If so, I regret not that I 
am out of the pale of her communion/ 

" In conclusion, let us inquire whether, by fair inference, this 
rule appertaining to class-meetings, which would exclude all 
the members of the Methodist E. Church who wilfully re- 
fuse to attend them, and cut off all such from the Lord's 
table in that Church, would not also preclude members of 
other churches, who do not attend class-meetings, from com- 
muning with the Methodists 1 I think it would. We have 
seen already that those excluded for the neglect of this duty 
are cut off from that privilege, though they may be genuine 
Christians, and in good standing in other churches. And 
the rule which says, ' No person shall be admitted to the 
Lord's Supper among us, who is guilty of any practice for 
which we would exclude a member of our Church,' would 
shut out from communion among the Methodists all mem- 
bers of other churches who do not practise attending class- 
meetings. Now, I would ask what are the facts in this case 1 
In the first place, class-meetings are a peculiarity of Meth- 
odism. There may be a few churches that have them to 
some limited extent ; but the great mass of the evangelical 
churches neither have them nor practise attending them. 
Their ' practice ' essentially varies from that of the Methodist 
E. Church, and is such as would exclude them from the Meth- 
odist E. Church if they belonged to it. Can the Methodists, 
then, admit them to the Lord's Supper 1 Their rule says, 
that they shall not be admitted. If they do admit them, 
21 



482 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. 

they break their own rules ; and this they ought not to do, 
for every travelling preacher is required to pledge himself 
i not to mend their rules, but to keep them ; not for wrath 
but conscience' sake.' See p. 46, art. 10." 

II. I maintain that the rules, and regulations, and direc- 
tions of the Discipline are all operative, and are enjoined to 
be observed in every point, great and small. The Confer- 
ence every four years revises the Discipline, and all that re- 
mains is binding, and the preachers solemnly bind themselves, 
by their solemn pledges and oaths, to keep them ; and there- 
fore if he gives an " open communion" invitation, he violates 
his obligations. Look at his pledges ! 

1. As a probationer seeking for admission as a member, 
he is put upon trial for six months, to see if he will observe 
and keep the rules. See " General Rules." 

2. When he is formally received into the Church, he is 
required to " give satisfactory assurances" of his " willingness 
to observe and keep the rules of the Church.'''' See part I., sec. 
11 : "And shall, on examination by the minister in charge, be- 
fore the Church, give satisfactory assurances both of the cor- 
rectness of their faith, and their willingness to observe and keep 
the rules of the Church." 

The following are a few of the rules especially and sacred- 
ly enjoined upon all preachers : 

"Be punctual. Do every thing exactly at the time. 
And do not mend our rules, but keep them ; not for wrath 
but conscience' sake. 

" Observe ! it is not your business only to preach so many 
times, and to take care of this or that society ; but to save 
as many as you can ; to bring as many sinners as you can 
to repentance, and with all your power to build them up in 
that holiness without which they cannot see the Lord. And 
remember ! — a Methodist preacher is to mind every point, 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 483 

great and small, in the Methodist Discipline ! Therefore you 
will need to exercise all the sense and grace you have. 

"Act in all things not according to your own will, but 
as a son in the gospel. As such, it is your duty to employ 
your time in the manner in which we direct: in preaching, 
and visiting from house to house ; in reading, meditation, 
and prayer. Above all, if you labor with us in the Lord's 
vineyard, it is needful you should do that part of the work 
which we advise, at those times and places which we judge 
most for His glory." 

When examined to be received as a travelling preacher 
into full connection, he is asked the following questions (see 
Dis., Part I., sec. viii. ) : 

"After solemn fasting and prayer, every person proposed 
shall then be asked, before the Conference, the following 
questions (with any others which may be thought necessary), 
namely : Have you faith in Christ % Are you going on to per- 
fection ? Do you expect to be made perfect in love in this 
life 1 Are you groaning after it ] Are you resolved to de- 
vote yourself wholly to God and his work ? Do you know 
the rules of society ? — of the bands 1 Do you keep them 1 
Do you constantly attend the sacrament 1 Have you read 
the form of Discipline % Are you- willing to conform to it ? 
Have you considered the rules of a preacher (see § 9), es- 
pecially the first, tenth, and twelfth 1 Will you keep them 
for conscience' sake 1 Are you in debt 1 

"Then if he give us satisfaction, after he has been employed 
two successive years in the regular itinerant work on circuits 
or in stations, which is to commence from his being received 
on trial at the Annual Conference, and being approved by 
the Annual Conference and examined by the President of 
the Conference, he may be received into full connection." 



484 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

Among the other duties commanded him, as a preacher 
in charge, are these : 

" As Methodists : Do you never miss your class or band ] 

" As preachers : Have you thoroughly considered your 
duty 1 And do you make a conscience of executing every 
part of it 1 Do you meet every society 1 Also, the leaders 
and bands 1 

"To see that every band-leader have the rules of the 
bands. 

" To enforce vigorously, but calmly, all the rules of the 
society. 

"To receive, try, and expel members, according to the 
form of Discipline. 

" To read the rules of the society, with the aid of the other 
preachers, once a year in every congregation, and once a 
quarter in every society." 

When he is ordained as a " deacon," he is required to take 
a solemn pledge to obey his chief ministers, who impose 
these duties upon him, and to follow their godly admonitions. 

" The bishop. Will you reverently obey them to whom 
the charge and government over you is committed, following 
with a glad mind and will their godly admonitions ? 

" Ans. I will endeavor so to do, the Lord being my 
helper." 

When he has proved himself faithful for four years, he is 
entitled to the degree of " elder," when he takes the following 
pledge, or rather oath, since it is promised in the name of 
God : it 

The bishop prefaces it thus, "And now that this present L 
congregation of Christ, here assembled, may also understand! U] 
your minds and wills in these things, and that this your pro- j n 
mise may the more move you to do your duties, ye shall fl 

A 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 485 

answer plainly to these things which we, in the name of God 
and his Church, shall demand of you touching the same. 

" The bishop. Will you reverently obey your chief 
ministers, unto whom is committed the charge and govern- 
ment over you ; following with a glad mind and will their 
godly admonitions, submitting yourselves to their godly 
judgments'? 

" Ans. I will so do, the Lord being my helper." 

In view of all these facts, am I not justified in saying that 
Methodist preachers are solemnly bound to observe every 
advice, every rule, every direction, and every ooint, great 
and small, within the lids of the Discipline 1 And that he 
violates the rules of his Discipline, and his solemn oaths at 
the same time, when he invites Baptists and Presbyterians 
to the Methodist table 1 

III, But they also flagrantly transgress the express com- 
mand, decision, and godly judgments of their bishops. 

Upon the construction and application of the rules for ob- 
serving the Lord's Supper, Bishops Coke and Asbury, in 
their notes on the Discipline, say, " We must also observe 
that our elders should be very cautious how they admit to 
communion persons who are not in our society." — Hist Bis., 
p. 323. 

Bishop HEDDiNG,,in his sermon upon the administration 
of the Discipline, which is now published by the " Book 
Concern" — and therefore his directions are operative — says, 
" Is it proper for a preacher to give out a general invitation 
in the congregation to members in good standing in other 
churches, to come to the Lord's Supper ? No ; for the most 
unworthy persons are apt to think themselves in good stand- 
ing. And sometimes persons who are not members of any 
'Church will take the liberty from such an invitation to come. 
And, again, there are some communities called churches, 



486 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

whicl^ from heretical doctrines, have no claims to the privi- 
leges" of Christians, and ought not to be admitted to the com- 
munion of any Christian people. 

" The rule in that case is as follows, and aught to be strictly 
adhered to : Let no person, who is not a member of our 
Church, be admitted to the communion without examination, 
and some token given by an elder or deacon," &c. — See 
Hedding, pp. 72, 73. 

Do not your preachers fly in the face of the Episcopal 
authority, when, in order to sour the minds and inflame the 
prejudices of the people, they give general invitations to all 
professed Christians, to come. " Come all who love God. We 
are not ' close communionists ;' it is the Lord's table ; come 
all the Lord's people. We have no authority to forbid you 
to come and eat at his table ; and we are not wicked enough 
to commit such a sin, nor such Pharisees as are some, to 
say, ' Stand back, we are holier than you ' " In what light 
shall we hold such a minister 1 Is he a conscientious — an 
honest man 1 

IV. I know of no denomination so rigidly close, so illiber- 
ally and unscripturally strict in their communion as are the 
Methodists, judging from their laws and regulations. 

1. They make the way a person carries his head a test of 
communion ; and the Scriptures say nothing of this. 

2. The shape of the bonnet worn ; and the Scriptures say 
nothing of this. 

3. The wearing of a " ruffle ;" and why not include plaits, 
and hems, and flounces, and bows, and ribbons % and the 
Scriptures say nothing of these as a test to the Supper. 

4. The wearing of a " ring ;" and why not include breast- 
pins, sleeve-buttons, lockets, and watch-keys, chains, and seals'? 

5. They are close communion in their class-meetings. 
Here is the law : 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 487 

" Q. How often shall we permit serious persons, who are 
not of our Church, to meet in class ? 

" A. At every other meeting of the class in every place let 
no stranger be admitted. At other times they may ; but 
the same person not above twice or thrice." 

6. Close communion, even in their love-feasts, for this is 
the law : 

" Q. How often shall we permit strangers to be present 
at our love-feasts ? 

" A. Let them be admitted with the utmost caution ; and 
the same persons on no account above twice or thrice, unless 
he become a member." 

7. In their band-meetings ; for to these there is positively 
no admittance to any but the household of faith. 

8. In singing-schools. Read the law : " Let it be recom- 
mended to our people not to attend the singing-schools 
which are not under our direction. 

9. In the very tune-books to be used ; for here is the 
Episcopal authority — " Recommend our tune-book ! " 

10. Close communion in trading, in employing workmen, 
or lawyers, or doctors ; and in political and civil .elections, 
Methodists must employ Methodist workmen, in preference 
to Baptists, Presbyterians, or men of the world ; trade with 
Methodist merchants in preference to all others ; take the 
pills of Methodist physicians, and cast their votes for the 
Methodist candidate for all civil offices, in preference to all 
others ! Here is the law, which the preachers are bound 
to see that their members observe, on pain of exclusion ; 
here is the law that is a disgrace to the name of religion : 

" It is expected of all who continue in these societies, 
that they should continue to evidence their desire of salvation, 

" By doing good, especially to them that are of the house- 
hold of faith, or groaning so to be. 



488 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL, 

"Employing them preferably to others; 

" Buying one of another ; 

" Helping each other in business ; 

" And so much the more because the world will love its 
own, and them only? 

This is commercial and political communion. It is in the 
power of the bishops and preachers of the Methodist Church 
to say which of two candidates shall be elected as a represen- 
tative, or senator, or judge, or governor, or president of the 
United States. They can cast the entire vote of Methodists 
upon any one man ! 

11. Close communion in matrimony. 

Here is the authority, far above the law or the prophets 
with mere Methodists : 

" We do not prohibit our people from marrying persons 
who are not of our Church, provided such persons have the 
form, and are seeking the power, of godliness ; but we are 
determined to discourage their marrying persons who do not 
come up to this description^* — Discipline. 

I am thoroughly convinced, from many years' observa- 
tion, that thousands of young persons are annually gathered 
into Methodist societies to facilitate their matrimonial alli- 
ances. A young man, the son of a Baptist — moral, but a 
non-professor, " falls in love" with the beautiful daughter of 
a rigid Methodist. The young people are mutually pleased 
with each other, and engage themselves. The affair is 
known to the old folks, and the young gentleman soon learns 
through the daughter that " pa is not very favorable to the 
union — because — he has no objection to you personally — but 
he thinks it highly improper for a Christian to inarry a sinner ; 
in fact, to tell you the truth, Charles, pa is determined that 
his children shall not marry out of the Church, and the 
preacher is opposed to it ; he professes to think a great deal 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 489 

of me, and he says if I marry you — you will take me off to 
the Baptist Church. It's all foolishness in them, but I tell 
you how you can remove all their objections, — just join our 
Church as a seeker, — there is no harm in that you know — 
you need not profess until you get ready, — just let the 
preacher have your name, and the old folks, and the preacher, 
too, and aunt Deborah, and Eunice, and uncle John, our 
class-leader, who now oppose us, will all be so delighted — 
and we can get married next week, if you wish." 

Now, who that understands the springs of action does not 
know that Charles' objections will be weak in proportion to 
his love for Mary, and of what avail will be the contrary 
advice of his parents — who see the wires that are being in- 
geniously fastened around their child — but to drive him all 
the sooner into the trap 1 So certainly as his parents raise 
their objections — though upon the sole ground that it is 
wrong — impious for a sinner and an impenitent sinner to 
join the Church, and more heinous from such motives — 
Charles will become a bitter Methodist, and a blind, preju- 
diced advocate of all the doctrines and usages of Methodism, 
and ten to one live and die in the society, a poor, unregene- 
rate " seeker," as tens of thousands have done before him. 

This matrimonial communion is a most ingenious net in 
which to take the young. Tt is purely of popish origin, and 
admirably adapted as a part of the machinery of priestcraft 
and sacerdotal strategy. 

12. Methodists are close communion in their Sabbath- 
schools. 

" Q. What shall we do for the rising generation ? 

"A. 1. Let Sunday-schools be formed in all our congrega- 
tions where ten children can be collected for that purpose. 
And it shall be the special duty of preachers having charge 
of circuits and stations, with the aid of the other preachers, 
21* 



490 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

to see that this be done ; to engage the cooperation of as 
many of our members as they can ; to visit the schools as 
often as practicable ; to preach on the subject of Sunday- 
schools and religious instruction in each congregation at least 
once in six months ; to lay before the Quarterly Conference at 
each quarterly meeting, to be entered on its journal, a written 
statement of the number and state of the Sunday-schools 
within their respective circuits and stations, and to make 
a report of the same to their several Annual Conferences." 

" 3. Let our catechisms be used as extensively as possible, 
both in our Sunday-schools and families ; and let the preach- 
ers faithfully enforce upon parents and Sunday-school teach- 
ers the great importance of instructing children in the doc- 
trines and duties of our holy religion. Let the preachers 
also publicly catechize the children in the Sunday-school, and 
at special meetings appointed for that purpose. It shall also 
be the duty of each preacher, in connection with reporting the 
Sabbath-school statistics at each Quarterly Conference, to 
state to what extent he has publicly or privately catechized 
the children of his charge." 

I notice this feature, not because I see any thing in it that 
is inconsistent with Methodism, or, did I believe in the doc- 
trines of the society, that I would not heartily approve, but 
because I would convince my own brethren, and all others 
who cannot endorse the doctrines of Methodism, that Meth- 
odist Sabbath-schools are very improper nurseries for the 
instruction of their children. 

Methodist Sunday-schools are under the supervision of 
the Quarterly Conference, and are all auxiliary to the Meth- 
odist "Sunday-School Union," which is not " The American 
Sunday-School Union." 

They are under the especial care and oversight of the 
preachers.^ 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 491 

The main object of their schools is to teach the Sabbath- 
school children, not Jesus, but Methodism — to instil the 
doctrines and usages of the Methodist E. Church into their 
young minds, and thus to bias them — prejudice them in fa- 
vor of the Methodist E. Church. Mark the rule. " Our 
catechisms" must be used, and the great importance of in- 
structing children in the doctrines and duties of " our holy reli- 
gion." (Bear these two words in mind, as I shall shortly ex- 
plain them by the catechism.) To be certain that the children 
are so instructed, the preacher must " catechize in the Sunday- 
schools, and even have special meetings appointed for that 
purpose." There is no doubt but that it is most faithfully 
done. 

Lest my language may appear severe and unwarranted, 
I will introduce the following letter, addressed to the Ten- 
nessee Baptist, by the pastor of the Baptist Church, Shel- 
by ville, Tenn. It appears that Bishop Capers fully explained 
to him why Methodists attach so much importance to their 
Sunday-schools, and so little to those under the direction of 
other denominations, and why they are so opposed to Union 
Sabbath-schools. 

" Brother Graves : — Though I have, perhaps, been suffi- 
ciently zealous in defence of Baptist principles and practices, 
and have been forward, on all suitable occasions, to expose 
what I conceived to be the errors of others, I have always 
been ready to extend the hand of recognition and love to all 
who acknowledge our Lord Jesus Christ, and to walk with 
them as far as we were agreed. I can believe Pedobaptists 
to be in error, and at the same time acknowledge them to be 
Christians, and as such, participate with them in many acts 
of Christian worship, and plans for the promotion of the 
cause of religion and the good of society, without compro- 
mising any principle, of truth or article of faith, or practice 



492 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

as a Baptist. This, I believe, is according to the prevailing 
opinions of our brethren everywhere. 

'* It has been conducive to the good of society in a great 
many instances, for Baptists and Pedobaptists to unite in 
neighborhoods and small villages, where more than one 
school could not be carried on, in sustaining Sabbath-schools. 
On this subject, however, Methodists have made themselves 
exclusive, and pursue a practice so sectarian that Baptists, at 
least, ought neither to unite with them in a school, or send 
their children to school under their control. It is their set- 
tled policy to make the Sabbath-school a nursery of Method- 
ism, in which, from their infancy, all the doctrines of the 
1 Discipline' are taught as Scripture truths. 

" I happened to be present during the sitting of the Ten- 
nessee Conference, two years ago, in Shelbyville, when the 
presiding bishop (Capers, I believe) delivered the following 
sentiments, which I noted down at the time. He remarked 
that Methodist preachers were deficient in their reports of 
Sabbath-schools — that many reported Union schools on 
their circuits over which Methodists did not have exclusive 
control — that he was opposed to these Union schools ; he 
wanted ' Methodist schools, where Methodist children could 
be taught Methodist doctrines.' This came from the ven 
erable bishop, in the form of an address to the ministers 
over whom he was . an overseer, and was regarded by me as 
instructions for their future guidance. Here, then, was an 
avowal of the intention of the Methodist Episcopal Church 
South, to make their Sabbath-schools decidedly sectarian. 

" In consummating their design, that denomination intro- 
duces into their schools sectarian books and tracts, and re- 
cently have commenced the publication of the Sabbath- 
School Visitor, which is introduced into all their schools, 
abounding with essays and pictures teaching infant baptism 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 493 

and church membership, sprinkling, pouring, ' falling from 
grace," salvation by half work and half grace, together with 
all the lax religious principles of Methodism. If Presbyte- 
rians and others are disposed to allow their children's minds 
to be poisoned with Methodism, I have nothing to say on 
the subject; but for the sake of the truth and the best in- 
terests of the souls of their children, I would warn all Bap- 
tists to be divorced from all Methodist Sabbath- schools. 

" M. H." 
-I therefore call the attention, not only of all Baptists, 
but of all parents, to the Methodist catechism, that they 
may see what " doctrines" and " duties" on " religion" are 
impressed upon and ingrained into their children's minds in 
Methodist Sunday-schools. 

I have, just procured from the " Book Concern," the cate- 
chism the Discipline enjoins to be used, and give you the 
following specimens of the doctrines and " duties" taught : 

" Q. What offices do we recognize in the Christian min- 
istry ? 

" A. Those of deacons, elders, and bishops 

" Q. What is the duty of a deacon 1 

" A. To read and expound the word of God, to instruct the 
young, and to assist the elder in his work. 

" Q- What is the duty of an elder 1 

" A. To preach the gospel, to administer the sacraments, 
and to exercise discipline in the Church. 

" Q. What is the duty of a bishop 1 

" A. To oversee the spiritual and temporal interests of the 
Church, to preach the gospel, to ordain other ministers, and 
to direct their labors. 

" Q. What distinguishing doctrines were preached by the 
Wesleys % 

" A. The guilt and total depravity of man, a present salva- 



494 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

tion by faith in Christ alone, and the direct witness of the 
Holy Spirit. 

"Q. What was the result of such preaching'? 

U A. A great and glorious revival of religion, the subjects 
of which were generally called Methodists. 

" Q. Has this revival ceased % 

V A. No ; its effects and benefits have come down to us, 
and thus the term Methodist has been perpetuated and 
made common. 

" Q. Why is our Church also called Episcopal 1 

" A. On account of its form of government, it being under 
the superintendence of bishops. 

" Q. What are some of the characteristics of the Methodist 
Episcopal Church ? 

"A. Its evangelical doctrines, its itinerant ministry, and its 
peculiar means of grace, namely, love-feasts and class-meet- 
ings. 

" Q. What is meant by the itinerancy 1 

"A. A system of ministerial labor by which, annually, 
every itinerant minister is designated to labor in some pro- 
per field, and every field, as far as possible, furnished with a 
minister. 

" Q. Do ministers and members of the Methodist Episco- 
pal Church enjoy as high and as complete spiritual immu- 
nities and advantages as any other Church, or branch of the 
Church of Christ % 

"A. They undoubtedly do. 

" Q- What is the water used in baptism designed to 
represent ? 

" A. The blood of Christ, by which he washes us from our 
sins. — Rev. i. 5 ; Heb. xii. 24 ; 1 Pet. i. 2. 

" Q. Is any particular mode of administering water in bap- 
tism enjoined in Scripture ? 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 495 

11 A. There is not; hence it is neither wise nor scriptural 
to insist upon any mode as essential to valid baptism. [! !] 

" Q. What mode of baptism does our Church most com- 
monly practise ? 

"A Sprinkling, as that for which we have the greatest 
number of Scripture examples and analogies. 

" Q- What obligations were laid upon you in Christian 
baptism 1 

" A. My baptism obliges me to renounce the devil and all 
his works, the pomp and vanity of this wicked world, and 
all the sinful lusts of the flesh ; also to believe the whole 
faith of the gospel, and to keep God's holy will and com- 
mandments, walking in the same all the days of my life. 

" Q. Is it right to lay such obligations upon young child- 
ren ? 

" A. It is ; for several reasons. 

" 1. Because God himself makes these requirements of all 
his creatures. 

" 2. Because they are under a natural and eternal obliga- 
tion to love and serve God, independent of this covenant. 

" 3. Because they are bound for their own good, and 
agreeably to the practice of mankind in other things. 

" Q, Ought not children to be carefully instructed in the 
nature and obligations of the baptismal covenant 1 

" A. They ought ; and as soon as they are capable, they 
ought to assume its pledges as their own. 

" Q. Will Christian baptism of itself save our souls ? 

;; A. It will not ; unless we indeed become new creatures 
in Christ, and are created in him unto good works, we shall 
forfeit the benefits secured to us by baptism. — 2 Cor. v. 17 ; 
Eph. ii. 10. 

" Q. Have we reason, then, to be grateful for this rite 
and ordinance of our holy religion ? 



496 THE GREAT IRON VHEEL. 

" A. We should indeed be grateful for it as a divinely- 
appointed means of enabling us to work out our salvation, 
and to lay hold on eternal life." 

My limits compel me to stop here, and I submit these 
quotations without comment, save this — let those parents 
who do not wish their children taught these " doctrines and 
duties" keep them from Methodist Sunday-schools. 

In conclusion, let me ask, in all earnestness, why will 
Methodist preachers continue to give general invitations to 
all professed Christians, and sinners too, and especially urge 
Baptists to come to their tables, and when they respectfully 
decline charge them with an unchristian spirit, and bigotry ; 
and when Baptists do not invite them abuse them for un- 
charitableness and want of liberality ? Methodist ministers 
have their rules and directions, as we have seen, and they are 
bound to their strict observance by all the sanctities of oaths 
and promises ; and why do they not keep them touching the 
administration of the Supper, as they are known to do in 
other matters 1 

Do they not invite Baptists to their table with the intent 
to insult us, to outrage our feelings, and to prejudice our 
views and practice in the eyes of the world ? For me to 
ask and urge a man or woman to do that — to participate in 
some act which I well knew his or her principles of honor 
or virtue would not allow, and which I well knew that man 
or woman considered criminal, would I not be offering a 
gross insult to that person % And suppose I had been re- 
pelled and rebuked again and again, in what light must my 
third and fifth and twentieth invitation be regarded ! ! Do 
not Methodist preachers know full well that Baptists can 
no more go to their tables, or commune with them with- 
out a surrender of all their principles and a violation of 
the word of God, than Methodist preachers can invite us 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 497 

to their tables without a violation of the word of their min- 
isters that they have pledged themselves reverently to 
obey ! But do Baptists act inconsistently with their own 
principles ? It is not alleged. Is it not well known to all 
intelligent Methodists, that the charge of close communion is 
no more applicable to Baptists than to themselves ? It is 
well known, and it is frankly admitted by them — and admit- 
ted and asserted, too, in a work now before me, published 
by the " Methodist Book Concern," and therefore the admis- 
sion is endorsed by the Methodist Church. I submit a 
lengthy extract, for an impartial examination. 

The work is by the " Rev. F. G. Hibbard," who, as a 
scholar and writer, has no superior in the Methodist E. 
Church. He says, — 

" The bearing which the mode of baptism is alleged to 
have on the validity of the ordinance ; and the connection 
which it bears to the lawful approach to the Lord's table, 
and to the rights and immunities of church fellowship ; these 
invest it with a character of paramount importance. The 
question no longer respects merely a ceremony of religion, 
but has assumed the bold and alarming aspect of Church or 
no Church ! Every ordinance, every institution, every rite 
and privilege of visible Christianity, is drawn along and 
merged into the bosom of this doubtful controversy. Within 
its ample folds are embraced the question of true Protest- 
antism and pure Christianity; while its capacious vortex 
has set in motion the very pillars of the visible Church, 
threatening to whelm it in its troubled waters. The issues 
of this controversy are to decide whether the Pedobaptist 
churches are the true churches of Christ ; whether their 
ministers hold their commission to administer the ordinances 
by a lawful tenure ; whether their members have any right 
to approach to the table of the Lord, and whether the privi- 



498 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

leges of the Church may be conceded to them without dese- 
cration. Verily, the question of the mode of baptism is a 
far-reaching subject. Without controversy it is a grave 
theme. 

" Before entering upon the argument before us, it is but just 
to remark that in one principle the Baptist and Pedobaptist 
churches agree. They both agree in rejecting from com- 
munion at the table of the Lord, and in denying the rights 
of Church fellowship to, all who have not been baptized. 
Valid baptism they consider as essential to constitute visible 
Church membership. This also we hold. The only question, 
then, that here divides us, is, ' What is essential to valid 
baptism ?' The Baptists, in passing the sweeping sentence 
of disfranchisement upon all other Christian churches, have 
only acted upon a principle held in common with all other 
Christian churches, viz., that baptism is essential to Church 
membership. They have denied our baptism, and as un- 
baptized persons we have been excluded from their table. 
That they err greatly in their views of Christian baptism, 
we, of course, believe. But, according to their views of bap- 
tism, they certainly are consistent in restricting thus their 
communion. We would not be understood as passing a 
judgment of approval upon their course ; but we say, their 
views of baptism force them upon the ground of strict com- 
munion, and herein they act upon the same principles as other 
churches, i. e., they admit only those whom they deem bap- 
tized persons to the communion table. Of course, they must 
be their own judges as to what baptism is. It is evident 
that, according to our views of baptism, we can admit them 
to our communion ; but with their views of baptism, it is 
equally evident, they can never reciprocate the courtesy. 
And the charge of close communion is no more applicable to 
the Baptists than to us, inasmuch as the question of Church 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 499 

fellowship with them is determined by as liberal principles 
as it is with any other Protestant churches, so far, I mean, 
as the present subject is concerned ; i. e., it is determined 
by valid baptism. 

" Now, this being the case, does it not become a measure 
of responsible moment to decide upon the question of the 
mode of baptism? Indeed, so awful are the aspects of this 
subject, that thousands have feared to assume a decided 
position in reference to it. They have held to exclusive im- 
mersion, and at the same time have held to catholic com- 
munion, or communion with persons who have not been 
immersed — an anomaly and absurdity that presents a sin- 
gular contrast to the characteristic symmetry of Christian 
theology."* 

1 also submit the declaration of Dr. Griffin, the highest 
authority in the Presbyterian Church. 

" I have always considered baptism by immersion as valid ; and were I imperi- 
ously called upon by the conscience of an applicant, and could do it without offence 
to others, I should have no hesitation in administering the ordinance in this form. 
In short. I regard your churches as churches of Christ. The question is, Is it rea- 
sonable in them so to regard us ? 

"The separating point is not about the subject of baptism, but merely the mode. If 
we could be considered as fairly baptized, our Baptist brethren certainly would not 
exclude us merely because we apply the seal to infants.* Many greater mistakes 
(allowing this to be one) are made by those whom we do not exclude from our 
communion. 

"I agree with the advocates for close communion in two points : (1.1 that baptism 
is the initiating ordinance which introduces us into the visible Church ; of course, 
where there is no baptism there are no visible churches : (2.) that we ought not to 
commune with those who are not baptized, and, of course, are not Church mem- 
bers, even if we regard them as Christians. Should a pious Quaker so far depart 
from his principles as to wish to commune with me at the Lord's table, while vet 
he refused to be baptized, I could not receive him ; because there is such a rela- 
tionship established between the two ordinances that I have no right to separate 
them ; in other words, I have no right to send the sacred elements out of the Church. 

The only question then is, whether those associations of evangelical Christians 
that call themselves churches, and that practise sprinklng, are real churches of 
Christ ; in other words, whether baptism by sprinkling is valid baptism." 

" If nothing but immersion is baptism, there is no visible Church except among 
the Baptists." 

* Most certainly we would, for Pedobaptist Societies must adopt the primitive 
form of Church government, before they can be recognized by Baptists as Christ- 
ian churches. 



LETTER XXXIX. 



THE "CALVINISM" OF THE CREED AND THE 
ARMINIANISM OF THE CLERGY. 

The "Articles of Religion" Calvinistic — They preclude the idea 
of the ultimate apostacy of the believer — The ground of 
Justification examined — The Scriptural argument — The 
Methodist clergy preach against their oivn creed as ivell 
as the teachings of Holy Scripture — Revival and Camp- 
meeting excitements — The doctrine of apostacy made neces- 
sary — The tendency of such teaching and doctrine is to make 
infidels. 

Dear Sir : — When I declare that the articles of your creed 
are Calvinistic, I would not be understood that they contain 
all the creed published to the world by John Calvin, nor the 
peculiarities of his creed which I consider Calvin-z'sw and 
therefore reject; but I mean that the doctrines of "original 
sin — of free will — of justification — of good works — of works 
of supererogation — of sin after justification," as set forth in 
your creed, are substantially those which your clergy de- 
nominate Calvinistic, and in their preaching subvert and in 
their practice wholly pervert and nullify. 

"Art. VII. Of Original or Birth Sin. 

" Original sin standeth not in the following of Adam (as 
the Pelagians do vainly talk), but it is the corruption of the 
nature of every man, that naturally is engendered of the 
offspring of Adam, whereby man is very far gone from ori- 

(500) 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 501 

ginal righteousness, and of his own nature inclined to evil, 
and that continually." 

The doctrine of total hereditary depravity is clearly set 
forth in this article — that all the offspring of Adam, through 
his sin, are born into the world with a depraved and corrupt 
nature, " very far gone from original righteousness," and " of 
his own nature inclined to evil, and that continually." If this 
be so — and I cordially consent to it — then, so long as he is left 
to himself — until he is "prevented" by "the grace of God" 
— until this natural disposition, this proclivity of his heart 
to sin, is changed by the Spirit of God — he departs from God; 
every imagination of his thoughts is evil and that continu- 
ally. This is all sound scriptural doctrine and fully sus- 
tained by your article VIII. 

"Art. VIII. Of Free Will. 

"The condition of man after the fall of Adam is such, that 
he cannot turn and prepare himself, by his own natural 
strength and works, to faith, and calling upon God ; wherefore 
we have no power to do good works, pleasant and accept- 
able to God, without the grace of God by Christ preventing 
us, that we may have a good will, and working with us when 
we have that good will." 

Neither Calvin nor any other writer ever set forth more 
distinctly the doctrine of man's utter inability to deter- 
mine his own will to repent and to turn to God, without 
first being graciously moved by the Holy Spirit — that by 
his own natural strength and works, be they what they 
may, he cannot turn to God, or " prepare himself to faith 
and calling upon God." No writer, however Calvinistic, 
could more clearly set forth the scriptural doctrine of the 
utter inability of the sinner, unmoved by the Spirit, to do 
good works, pleasant and acceptable to God, " without the 
grace of God by Christ preventing" [i. e. 5 working in him 



502 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. 

beforehand], that he may have a good will, and working 
with him after it has wrought that good will or inclination 
in him. " No man cometh unto me except it were given 
him of my Father." (John vi. 65.) " No man can come 
unto me except the Father which hath sent me draw him." 
(John vi. 44.) No sinner, then, can produce this good will 
in himself, or by his self-determination alone, turn his heart 
towards God and exercise that saving faith in Christ. He 
never will feel inclined to exercise such a will — never feel 
the disposition to repent and turn to God, unless the Holy 
Spirit, through the grace of God, first forms that will and 
creates that holy disposition in his heart ; and every move- 
ment he makes towards God is produced by that grace 
" working with him." He can only work out (i. e., manifest — 
demonstrate) what God works within, to will and to do of 
his own good pleasure. So long as that grace works in him 
he will work out and work, on — and that grace will not leave 
him, you admit, so long as he works out. Where is there a 
place left for him to fall from this saving grace and this 
gracious faith 1 It was freely bestowed without merit — and 
will it be withdrawn because the subject is without merit? 

But who ever heard this doctrine stated from a Methodist 
pulpit, unless to be denounced as Calvinistic, pernicious, 
" originating in hell," &c. Who ever heard the sovereignty 
of God, and the sinner's total depravity and utter inability, 
preached in a Methodist camp or revival meeting 1 

Consistent with this evangelical doctrine of grace without 
works of merit, and therefore sovereign grace is your " Cal- 
vinistic" doctrine of justification by faith alone. 

"Art. IX. Of the Justification of Man. 

" We are accounted righteous before God, only for the 
merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, and not 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 503 

for our own works or deservings. Wherefore, that we are 
justified by faith only, is a most wholesome doctrine, and 
very full of comfort." 

This article is pure gold. It is the only hope of Adam's 
ruined race, the only sheet-anchor of our hope in the wreck- 
ing storms of life's ocean — and it reaches unto, and is buried 
in the cleft of the Rock of ages within the veil. 

It teaches that our justification before God does not rest 
upon ourselves — upon our own merit, or upon any thing we 
have done or may do, but solely, wholly, surely, and eter- 
nally upon the righteousness of Jesus Christ, imputed to us 
when we, being graciously moved and assisted by the Holy 
Spirit, flee to Christ and accept of his sacrifice as our sin- 
offering. Truly is it added, " that we are justified by faith 
only is a most wholesome doctrine and very full of comfort." 

Your article touching good works is as " Calvinistic" and 
scriptural, as wholesome and full of comfort, as the last, and 
very appropriately follows it. 

"Art. X. Of Good Works. 

"Although good works, which are the fruits of faith, and 
follow after justification, cannot put away our sins, and en- 
dure the severity of God's judgments; yet are they pleasing 
and acceptable to God in Christ, and spring out of a true and 
lively faith, insomuch that by them a lively faith may be as 
evidently known as a tree is discerned by its fruit." 

Good works, then, are not the ground of faith — are not 
the procuring cause of faith — do not superinduce faith, nor 
preserve one in the exercise of faith, any more than the apple 
hanging upon the branch produced the root of the tree that 
bears it — than it produced the sap that caused the bud from 
which it was pushed forth to swell, or made the leaf that covers 
it ; nor does that apple produce the sap or the influences that 



504 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

are ripening it for the master's use. As the apple is the pro- 
duce, the result, the fruit of these causes (?'. e., the root, the 
tree, the sap), so good works are the fruits, the inevitable 
and inseparable results of inwrought faith ; they are not a 
part of our justifying righteousness before God — though they 
are pleasing in his sight and acceptable to him — nor an ele- 
ment of faith ; but they are the fruits of faith, and follow 
after justification ; they do not produce faith in the heart, 
much less preserve faith in the heart, "but they spring out 
of a true and lively faith, insomuch that by them a lively 
faith may be as evidently known as [the character of] a tree 
is discerned by its fruit." 

I accept this allusion to a fruit-bearing tree. Who gave 
to the apple-tree its character % Who made it an apple-tree, 
instead of a brier 1 Who gave to it that peculiar nature, 
causing it to bear sweet apples rather than sour ones 1 Who 
gives it vitality ? Who sends the life-blood through its thou- 
sand veins, vitalizing every limb and twig, and causing it to 
bud, and blossom, and nourish, and bear fruit for the benefit 
of man and to the glory of God's matchless wisdom ? Can 
that tree change its own nature, transform itself at pleasure 
into a crabbed thorn this year, and back again into a royal 
red-pippin the next 1 Can it bear the delicious sweet this, and 
the bitter sour next year % God, who gave it its peculiar 
nature, alone can change it, but does he so act in the govern- 
ment of the vegetable world % Did he ever thus change the 
nature of fruit-bearing trees, so that man could " gather 
grapes from thorns, and figs from thistles V 1 It was his own 
sovereign pleasure that prompted him to have compassion 
upon one of Adam's depraved and ruined offspring, prompted 
him to incline his will to run after him — to change his 
wicked disposition, freely justify him, when ungodly, by his 
grace, melt his hard heart into penitence, cleanse it by the 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 505 

blood of his Son, renew and sanctify it, and by his Holy Spirit 
impress the royal seal upon it — sealing it " unto the day of re- 
demption," as the purchase of a Saviour's blood, and the 
travail of a Saviour's soul 1 If he did all this when we were 
sinners — when he saw no merit in us, will he undo it all — 
nullify his acts and stultify his promises, because he still sees 
no merit in us, no righteousness meritorious in his sight ? We 
have to do with no such God ; rather, no such God has to do 
with us. The sinner cannot of himself change his own disposi- 
tion, or regenerate his own heart. As well might the Ethiopian 
change his skin, or the leopard his spots. God made the 
world, God alone can unmake it. God alone has power to 
regenerate the sinner's heart, and he alone can unregenerate 
it — turn it back into the chaotic darkness and natural vileness 
of its primeval state. But he never began a good work in 
man's heart to treat thus — he never laid the foundations of 
a tower, and, through the lack of ability or change of inten- 
tion or inclination, left it to shame his forecast or reproach 
his judgment. 

This fact is incontrovertibly settled by your creed. " Good 
works are the fruits of faith, and follcnv after justification." 
Then so long as the heart is justified, it will evidence it by 
good works. A good tree will bear good fruit. It may not 
bear so much fruit one season as another, or so good fruit, if 
you please ; various circumstances may conspire to prevent 
it ; but it will bear some fruit — it will show some evidence of 
vitality ; and one thing is certain, the little fruit, or the in- 
sipid and imperfect fruit, it may bear one year or a number 
of years, does not change the nature of the tree. It is still a 
sweet apple-tree, if there be but one little shrivelled apple 
upon it this year, and it is a sweet apple, whatever there is 
of it, though not so delicious as it might be. 

Your article touching works of supererogation is also 
22 



506 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

sound. You justly teach that, " When we have done all 
that is commanded [which none of us, and no man living or 
dead ever did], we are unprofitable servants." Therefore, 
our remaining in a state of justification or regeneration does 
not depend upon our good works, or our profitableness, which 
is also true. Touching sin after justification, your article is 
faultless. It reads, — 

" XII. Of Sin after Justification. 

" Not every sin willingly committed after justification is 
the sin against the Holy Ghost, and unpardonable. Where- 
fore, the grant of repentance is not to be denied to such as 
fall into sin after justification: after we have received the 
Holy Ghost, we may depart from grace given, and fall into 
sin, and, by the grace of God, rise again and amend our 
lives. And therefore they are to be condemned who say 
they can no more sin as long as they live here ; or deny the 
place of forgiveness to such as truly repent." 

There is nothing " wn-Calvinistic" in this. If construed by 
the teachings of the previous articles noticed, it only teaches 
that we may sin after our justification ; and I would go fur- 
ther and say, w r e all have sinned since our justification, and 
we all do sin, and that daily ; and we shall need to pray, and 
with tears of repentance, the prayer our Saviour taught his 
disciples, " Forgive us our trespasses," every day we con- 
tinue in the flesh ; and every child of God will need to pray 
it with tears 

" Till prayers and tears shall end." 

It also truly teaches that every sin thus committed, is not 
against the Holy Ghost, and unpardonable ; and, therefore, 
there is room for repentance, and we should repent. Your 
article does not define in what the sin against the Holy Ghost 
consists. None but God knows when the sinner passes that 
Rubicon of hope and mercy. 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 507 

It says, " After we have received the Holy Ghost, we 
may depart from grace given, and fall into sin, and by the 
grace of God rise again and amend our lives." 

Let us inquire closely into the meaning of this passage ; 
for unless the possibility of the final apostacy and damnation 
of a child of God is taught in this solitary passage, it is not 
taught in your creed or Discipline ! Let it be granted that 
every sin is a departure from God. I have granted that 
all Christians do sin, and sin daily ; and he that saith he hath 
no sin is a liar, and the truth is not in him. All Christians 
can sing, with the spirit and the understanding, such senti- 
ments as these, that abound in our books of spiritual songs : 

" How oft, alas ! this wretched heart 
Has wandered from the Lord ! 
How oft my roving thoughts depart, 
Forgetful of his word ; 
Prone to wander ; Lord, I feel it- 
Prone to leave the God I love." 

But does the above passage teach the possibility of the 
true Christian ever falling beyond the grace of God 1 To sup- 
pose so, would be to suppose that this article stultifies all the 
teachings of the four preceding articles, and even palpably 
contradicts itself; for it says, those who thus sin "may, by 
the grace of God, rise again and amend their lives." To say 
that a Christian may fall beyond the grace of God, and yet, 
by the grace of God rise again would be a solecism, and then it 
would be in direct conflict with the teaching of God's word. 

For in the case supposed, in the 6th and 10th chapters of 
Hebrews (it is one and the same supposition in hot 1 ! chap- 
ters), it positively declares that there would be no place for 
repentance left to the offender ; that he would cast himself 
beyond the circumference of God's mercy. The passage, 
then, affords no probable ground upon which to build the doc- 



508 THE GKEAT IRON WHEEL. 

trine of the possibility of the ultimate apostacy and damna- 
tion of a regenerated and redeemed soul. 

It is a guard against the Antinomianism that was so prev- 
alent when this was written. It simply states the scriptural 
doctrine, that Christians may sin, and that they may repent; 
that they may fall into sin — fall below their Christian- privi- 
leges, and depart from grace given — from the ardor of their 
first love; abuse God's favors; and yet by his grace be 
brought back to an amendment of life, and the light of God's 
countenance. 

The idea of a believer's final apostacy is not intimated in 
this article in the faintest manner ; there is nothing bearing the 
semblance of such a doctrine. To say that this article gives 
support to such a doctrine, is to affirm that the article is 
contradictious. Its teachings are as scriptural, as "wholesome, 
and as full of comfort" as the preceding ones. 

Peter sinned when he denied his Saviour thrice, and " fell," 
but not beyond God's grace. He was in a state of faith, and 
consequently of justification and regeneration, while fallen ; 
for the Saviour, foretelling him his sin, said, " I have prayed 
for thee, that thy faith fail not;" and did it fail ? Did not 
the Father hear the Son, whom he heareth always ? And j 
why did the Saviour suffer Satan thus to sift Peter? For 
the same reason he permits Satan to sift his children now — 
to sift the chaff out of him. Peter was an Arminian, and | 
he needed to be converted — not regenerated in heart, but con- 
verted from a false doctrine. He fancied he was strong | 
enough to stand alone — to keep himself, and that he had all j 
along kept himself, and must in all future time keep himself, 
as thousands of professed Christians imagine they must keep 
themselves Christians, by their good works and religious ex- 
ercises and duties. Christ knew that Peter needed to be 
converted from this idea; for such a doctrine robbed him of 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 509 

part of his glory, and would depreciate the value of his 
atonement and power in the eyes of Peter ; and then Peter 
might go forth and preach, as others do, if a man can keep 
himself a Christian, he can make himself one. 

The Saviour said unto Peter, " When thou art converted, 
strengthen thy brethren." Did he do it 7 If any one doubts, 
let him turn to the first letter he ever wrote, and see if he 
does not " strengthen" them, even in the salutation itself. 
Bead it, and see how it grinds into fine dust the doctrine of 
standing by works, and of keeping in faith by keeping in 
works. 

" Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
which, according to his abundant mercy, hath begotten us 
again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ 
from the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled, 
and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you, who 
are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation, 
ready to be revealed in the last time." (1 Pet. i. 3-5.) 

Notice the richness of the doctrine, begotten according to 
his " abundant mercy' — bless God for that — "unto a lively 
hope, to an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled," and un- 
fading, reserved in heaven for you, who are kept." Yes, there 
it comes — " are kept ;" and bless God for that — but it was 
dear experience to poor Peter ! Are kept by the power of 
whom, Peter 1 of one another % of good works ? of one's own 
strength? No, no. Power of the angels in heaven? It 
would be a fearful hope, for angels have fallen. No, " power 
of God." Aye; there is the rock in the promise. Through 
what medium does God exert this power % " Through faith." 
And how long does God promise to exert it to keep us 1 
Unto salvation." And how does it keep us 1 " Ready to 
be revealed in the last time." Well may we rejoice, who 
build on such a rock as this. But, Peter, are you sure 



510 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

that this faith, of which God is the author and finisher, will 
not fail in some instance, when it is tried, as it were, in the 
fire '< Hear his answer : " Wherein [in the fact that we are 
kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation] ye 
greatly rejoice (though now for a season, if need be, ye are 
in heaviness through manifold temptations) ; that the trial 
of your faith, being much more precious than [the trial] of 
gold that perisheth, though it [your faith] be tried with fire, 
might be found unto praise, and honor, and glory at the ap- 
pearing of Jesus Christ." Can gold be destroyed by fire 1 
The intenser the heat of the crucible the purer the gold that 
comes from it. But the trial of the Christian's faith is " much 
more precious." 

Methodist preachers certainly do not find a ground for 
their doctrine from the creed of the Discipline. And when 
they preach apostacy, as they do, they preach contrary to the 
express teachings of their articles of religion ! Let this be 
remembered, and urged upon them. They do not find it in 
the ritual of baptism ; for that supposes every one baptized 
to be spiritually regenerated at the same time — to be intro- 
duced into vital union with Christ their head, and, conse- 
quently, made partakers of the life of Christ, which is ever- 
lasting. It supposes them introduced into the new covenant 
of God's grace, and their titles to all its blessings sealed to 
them by their baptism. But that is an everlasting covenant, 
which, unlike the old one, never can be broken. All who are 
sealed in that covenant are "sealed unto the day of redemp- 
tion." But the ritual teaches that all who are baptized are 
thereby introduced into the number of God's "elect child- 
ren." " Grant that the persons now to be baptized may 
receive the fulness of thy grace, and ever remain in the num- 
ber of thy faithful and elect children" &c. The same sentence 
closes the prayer used upon the baptism of infants. Cer- 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 511 

tainly no 0113 can remain in the number of the elect, unless 
previously introduced into that number. 

Whatever views we may have upon the subject of election, 
we are agreed — for all agree in this- — that God knows, in a 
particular sense, all his elect children. "The foundation of 
God standeth sure, having this seal, the Lord knoweth them 
that are his." The " elect children" are given to the Son by 
the Father ; they are his to keep until he maketh up his 
jewels. He calls them his sheep; for they are no longer 
goats : and he says of such, " My sheep hear my voice, and I 
know them, and they follow me ; and I give unto them eternal 
life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them 
out of my hand. My Father which gave them me is greater 
than all ; and none [or no one] is able to pluck them out 
of my Father's hand." At the last day he will be able 
to say, as he did before his death, " Of all the Father hath 
given me have I lost none, save the son of perdition, that the 
Scriptures might be fulfilled." But Judas never was a 
sheep — never more than a professed disciple ; for, said the 
Saviour, " Have I not chosen you twelve, and one of you is 
a devil?" 

Not one of those whom Christ knows as his " elect child- 
ren" will be found upon the left hand, or sentenced to depart, 
at the last day. Thousands of ministers and members will 
be found there who were confident they would be accepted 
because of their works ; for these they plead, but Christ never 
knew them as his regenerated children. " Many will say unto 
me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied [preach- 
ed] in thy name, and in thy name have cast out devils, 
and in thy name done many wonderful works V Every sect 
in Christendom plead that because there have been revivals 
among them — wonderful works done, and numberless sin- 
ners gathered within thHr pale — therefore they are churches 



512 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

of Christ. So reasoned these, but Christ never knew one of 
them as his. " Then will I profess unto them I never knew 
you ; depart from me." This scripture must conclusively set- 
tle the question in all candid minds, waiving all discussion 
whether it were possible for a child of God to be lost, that 
no child of God ever will be lost! 

There is only one expression in the baptismal office which 
may seem to imply a doubt on the mind of some, viz. : "And 
our Lord Jesus Christ hath promised, in his holy word, to 
grant all those things that we have prayed for ; which 
promise he, for his part, will most surely keep and perform. 
Wherefore, after this promise made by Christ, you must 
also faithfully, for yo ur part, promise, in the presence of this 
whole congregation, that you will renounce the devil and all 
his works, and constantly believe God's holy word, and obe- 
diently keep his commands." 

A word will explain all this conditional salvation. As I 
have shown in the letter on Baptism, the whole office for 
baptism supposes no one regenerated before baptism. The 
Discipline has no office for the baptism of believer's, ! It sup- 
poses all to be regenerated, introduced into the number of 
God's elect children and into the new covenant of grace, and 
all its blessings sealed to them in and by baptism. See the 
prayer referred to above — " Give thy Holy Spirit to these 
persons that they may be born again, and be made heirs of 
everlasting salvation ;" thus teaching that they never had pre- 
viously received the regenerating influences of the Holy Spi- 
rit. The language I am discussing, then, only binds them, on 
their part, to renounce the devil, &c, that they may receive 
the promised grace. There is popery enough in the form } 
but there is no Arminianism in the doctrine — it gives no coun- 
tenance to the doctrine of falling from saving grace. Where, 
then, do Methodist preachers find their commission to preach 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 518 

justification by works, from which ground the doctrine of 
the possibility of a genuine Christian's final apostacy and 
damnation can be concluded % Not from the creed, not from 
the ritual — I hereby exonerate the Discipline from giving 
the least favor to such an idea. It positively forbids the pos- 
sibility of such a doctrine. It cannot exist in any system of 
theology which recognizes the vital doctrine of justification by 
faith alone, and especially when joined with the article upon 
"free will" as it stands in your Discipline. If any one 
claims that Mr. Wesley taught it, I will hold myself bound 
to show that Mr. Wesley stultifies himself — that his teach- 
ings are contradictious. 

The Argument for Justification alone by Faith in the 
Righteousness of Christ, from Reason and Scripture. 

Reason teaches that our salvation must rest upon one of 
three grounds : 

1. Upon our own righteousness alone, or 

2. Upon the righteousness of Christ alone, or 

3. Partly upon our own righteousness, and partly upon 
Christ's. 

It cannot rest upon our own righteousness : 1st, According 
to the Articles of Religion ; for Art. XI. endorses the teaching 
of Christ in these words, " When ye have done all that is 
commanded you, say we are unprofitable servants" and Art. 
IX. declares that we are accounted righteous before God 
only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by 
faith, and not for our own works or deservings. 2d, According 
to the Scriptures — " But after that the kindness and love of 
God our Saviour toward man appeared, not by works of 
righteousness which we have done, but according to his 
mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration and re- 
newing of the Holy Ghost ; which he shed on us abundantly 
through Jesus Christ our Saviour ; that being justified by his 
22* 



514 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of 
eternal life. (Tit. iii. 4-7.) " And be found in him, not having 
mine own righteousness, which is of the law [works], but 
that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness 
which is of God by faith." (Phil. iii. 9.) 3d, The law of 
God by which we must be justified will only be satisfied 
by a perfect obedience — a perfect righteousness. It must 
find that either in ourselves or in our substitute — our 
Surety. It cannot find it in ourselves — we have all 
transgressed it ten thousand times, and we still continue to 
violate its letter, "and with the flesh serve the law of sin." 
" Therefore, by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be 
justified in his sight, * * * for all have sirmed and 
come short of the glory of God." (Rom. iii. 20, 23.) " Christ 
is become of none effect unto you, whosoever of you are justi- 
fied by the law ; ye are fallen from grace" Those, then, who 
depend upon the law or works of righteousness, in whole 
or in part, for justification in the sight of God, make Christ 
of none effect — reject the righteousness and atonement of 
Christ, and despise and fail of his grace. 

Our sole ground of justification, then, must rest upon the 
righteousness of Christ alone, imputed to us. 

Christ is our Surety if we accept him, and the law, failing 
to find the righteousness it requires of us — which we owe 
to it — must look to our Surety, and if it fails to find it in 
him, we fall under its penalty. But, bless God, it can harm 
us not until the righteousness of Christ fails or is found im- 
perfect. 

Wonderful and glorious plan ! We are Christ's sin, and he 
is our righteousness — our sins are imputed to him, and his 
righteousness is imputed to us ! 

" Arise ! my soul, arise, 
Shake off thy guilty fears— 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 515 

The bleeding Sacrifice 

In thy behalf appears ; 
Before the throne my Surety stands 

My name is written on his hands !" 

The scape-goat and the lamb of the sin-offering were types 
of Christ. See how clearly and beautifully they taught. 
" And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the 
live goat and confess over him all the iniquities of the child- 
ren of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, 
putting them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him 
away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness," where 
he will not be seen any more. Thus teaching that the 
great Sacrifice upon whom our sins are laid will for ever put 
away our sins. 

"My soul would lay her hand 

On that dear head of thine, 
While like a penitent I stand, 

And there confess my crime. 
Believing I rejoice 

To see the curse remove ; 
We bless the lamb with cheerful voice, 

And sing his bleeding love." 

But what say the Scriptures touching the imputed right- 
eousness of Christ 1. 

His righteousness is imputed to us when we believe in him, 
accept him as our substitute, our Surety, our Saviour ; and is 
therefore called the " righteousness of faith". " And he 
[Abraham] received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the 
righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircum- 
cised ; that he might be the father of all them that believe, 
though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might 
be imputed unto them also." " Now it was not written for 
his sake alone, that it was imputed to him, but for us also, 
to whom it [«'. e., the righteousness of faith] shall be imputed, 



516 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

if we believe in him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the 
dead; who was delivered [suffered] for our offences, and 
was raised again for our justification," 

Now we have no ground to fear, for his righteousness is 
perfect — finished— everlasting — and all his righteousness is 
ours. And this is the name whereby he shall be called, " The 
Lord our Righteousness ;" and blessed are they who put their 
trust in him. 

Let us look at the apostle's illustration of this imputed 
righteousness — how the law looks to another to discharge 
the debt of obedience we owe it. He alludes to the law of 
marriage, and I accept it. Suppose, if you please, a young 
lady is impoverished and in disgrace through the improvi- 
dence or sins of her parents. She has incurred debts to the 
amount of thousands, and has nothing to pay — she never can 
discharge them. The law of imprisonment for debt is in 
force, and she can be incarcerated for life, at any hour her 
creditor sees fit. Her condition is hopeless, for the cred- 
itor is unrelenting. The son of a Rothschild sees her, 
pities her, loves her, offers her his hand in marriage. She 
hesitates, fears and trembles, because of the claims of the 
law upon her for her debts. He points to his immense 
wealth, which will be holden for her debts, provided she 
consents to marry him; he explains to her how the law 
will, can no longer look to her for payment, but to him, as 
her husband — that her debts are imputed to him, and his 
wealth is imputed to her. She fearfully asks if his wealth is 
sufficient to discharge her liabilities. He assures her that 
so vast are his possessions the sum will not be missed. 
But she will needs be constantly — daily— making debts; 
she must be supported, and she has nothing to pay. He 
again assures her that his property will not only be holden 
for all her past indebtedness, but also for all the debts she 






CHRISTIANITY REVERSED 617 

will incur while she lives ; and all these cannot sensibly 
diminish it. His love and boundless generosity over- 
come her. She accepts his hand, and falls into his arms — 
he is her temporal saviour, her husband. Now, is she not 
free from the law ? Can it ever look to her again 1 Must it 
not look to her husband for her old debts, and for all she 
may incur ? And is not her former reproach all removed, 
and does she not participate in the dignity and honor of her 
husband, and are they not one % 

So the believer — the Christian — is married to Christ, says 
Paul. He was once in disgrace, depraved through the sins 
of our first parents. He was in debt to the law ten thousand 
talents, and had nothing to pay, and he must ever incur in- 
debtedness to it while he lives. He was in danger of being 
shut up in the law's prison-house of eternal despair. He was 
vile and unlovely as he was wicked, possessed of nothing to 
commend him to the favor or even pity of any one ; but Jesus 
passed that way, saw him, and, strange to say, loved him, and 
offered him his hand in marriage ; to make him one with him- 
self—joint-heir with him in all his infinite possessions, and raise 
him to glory, honor, and eternal life, at his right hand. His 
love secures the sinner's love, and he accepts the gracious, un- 
merited gift. In Scripture phrase, he is married to Christ, 
and the law relinquishes its claims upon the sinner, and looks 
evermore to Christ for all past, present, and future indebt- 
edness incurred by him. There is no possible chance for the 
released to fall back into the grasp of the law while Christ 
lives ; for the marriage contract provides against that. He 
is made one with Christ, and Christ, therefore, becomes his 
life ; his life is hid with Christ in God, and the pledge of 
Christ to him is, because I live you shall live also. And 
more ; he is adopted into God's family of redeemed ones as 
a child, and made brother to Christ. He no more fears the 



518 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL., 

law, for he is no more under it, but under grace. Christ is 
his law, being made the end of the law for righteousness 
to him. The child of God is for ever released from his bond- 
age of fear on account of the threatenings of the law. " For 
ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear, but 
ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby ye cry, 
' My Father.' " That man or woman who is still under the 
bondage of fear, is in a state of condemnation. Where is 
there a place for his falling short of salvation'? Was not 
the believer safe, and saved evermore, the hour he first 
believed'? 

Can he lose his spiritual life through the wiles and deceit 
or malice of the devil ? How can it be supposed, since Christ 
is his life 1 Can the devil harm or destroy Christ ? But 
his " life is hid " — from the grasp of the enemy who would 
destroy it, of course — where? "With Christ in God" Can 
old Satan find it now 1 He could not so much as find the body 
of Moses, which God, for some wise purpose, sent an angel 
to hide, though he spared no pains, and endeavored to 
force the angel to discover it to him ; but he did not succeed. 
Can he, then, find the Christian's life? Can he force the 
Almighty to surrender it ? Can he, at the head of his datk 
legions, carry by storm the bulwarks of heaven, and pierce 
through all the serried rank of angelic legions ; through 
cherubim and archangels that form the throne and body- 
guard of the Eternal, and lay open a Father's heart — force 
from the Saviour's hand the ransomed, blood-washed soul of a 
redeemed saint ? And yet all this Satan would have to do to 
bring to ruin one child of God. Surely none can pluck him 
out of the Father's hand. But will every one so hid at last 
be saved ? " And when Christ, who is our life, shall appear, 
then will we also appear with him in glory." 

But cannot Satan by his cunning devices cheat him out of 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 619 

his will to his eternal possessions ? Not unless he can rob 
Christ of his also. Christ gave him a deed — not a mere 
title-bond, as Arminians would have it — to eternal life ; " to 
an inheritance incorruptible, undefiied, and unfading," that is 
reserved in heaven for him ; — strange to say, made him an 
heir of God himself, i. e., of all that God possesses to be- 
stow ; and. in order to make it sure — so that his title could 
never be questioned or destroyed — he made him joint-heir 
with himself, and so we are, if believers, " heirs of God and 
joint-heirs with Christ." Then the Christian's title, to day, is 
just as good, and just as safe and secure as is that of Jesus 
Christ. What Christian will not rejoice with joy unspeak- 
able and full of glory at this glorious promise and provision 1 
" Truly, the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not ;" 
nor do the carnal-minded understand either the value or the 
tenure by which we hold our spiritual possessions ; but we 
know them : for it is written, " Eye hath not seen, nor 
ear heard, neither hath it entered into the heart of [carnal] 
man, the things which God hath prepared for those that love 
him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit." 
And it is the glorious prospect of these things secured to us, 
not upon our own works or worthiness, but the abounding 
grace of God, and the sure word of "his promise, that cheers 
our courage by the way ; that weans us from the idolatry of 
this world's perishing wealth ; that supports us in bereave- 
ments ; that gladdens us in solitude, affliction, and gloom ; 
that fills our hearts with gladness, and our lips with praise, 
and our eyes with visions of glory in the hour of death. 

But does the soul that has been all his life in bondage to 
works still ask, "May we not be separated by the great 
enemy, or in some unforeseen way separate ourselves from 
the love of Christ V 



520 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

Hear the apostle's answer : " And we know that all things 
work together for good to them that love God, to them who 
are the called according to his purpose. For whom he did 
foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the 
image of his Son, that he might be the first-born among 
many brethren. Moreover, whom he did predestinate, 
them he also called : and whom he called, them he also 
justified : and whom ho justified, them he also glorified. 
W hat shall we then say to these things ? If God be for us, 
who can be against us ? He that spared not his own Son, 
but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him 
also freely give us all things ? Who shall lay any thing to the 
charge of God's elect 1 ? It is God that justifieth : who is he 
that condemneth 1 It is Christ that died, yea, rather, that is 
risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also 
maketh intercession for us. Who shall separate us from the 
love of Christ 1 shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution 
or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword % As it is writ- 
ten, For thy sake we are killed all the day long ; we are 
accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Nay, in all these things 
we are more than conquerors, through him that loved us. 
For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, 
nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things 
to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall 
be able to separate us from the love of God which is in 
Christ Jesus our Lord." (Rom. viii. 28-39.) 

This passage puts it out of the power of the man himself to 
separate himself; for if he is not included in the first enumera- 
tion, he is swept by " any other creature," for he is a creature. 
It is perfectly monstrous to suppose that one who has tasted 
of the love of Christ, which passeth understanding, been freed 
from the condemnation of the law and the terror of God's 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 621 

wrath, should desire to be separated from that love, rest 
again under that curse, and experience the forebodings of 
that wrath. It is not supposable. Then, the true Christian 
would not if he could, and could not if he would, be sepa- 
rated from the love of Christ. He is married to Christ, and 
there is no divorce in heaven for such marriages. He has 
been grafted into Christ, and become inseparably united to 
him. He is a member of Christ's body, and that body can- 
not be maimed. He has entered into the new and everlast- 
ing covenant, and it cannot be broken. He has tasted of 
the tree of life, which grows in the midst of the paradise of 
God, and must live for ever. 

"But there are very many who say they have been 
Christians more than twenty times, who are now outrageous 
sinners — bold, blasphemous, and acknowledged infidels." I 
am not surprised at this. I would expect such to be infi- 
dels. I never knew an infidel who had not been made so 
by Arminianism ; — had fallen from grace a few times — just 
enough to disgust and sicken him with the name of religion. 

What says God's word concerning all such characters'? 
" He that saith I have known him, and keepeth not his com- 
mandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. (1 John 
ii. 4.) 

I have translated the second verb in the perfect tense, be- 
cause it is in the perfect tense in the original, and all scholars 
will agree in this. This, then, is its explicit teaching : If 
any man says that he once knew Christ, once was a Christ- 
ian, and does not now love him; and is not now endeavor- 
ing to keep his commandments, he is a liar, and the truth is 
not in him. There are, alas ! thousands of such liars ; and 
this doctrine ,of apostacy and falling from grace, is the 
maker of them all, and is multiplying such liars by thou- 
sands each year. 



522 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL 

Objections to the Perseverance to all Saints answered, 

I am aware that there are many urged, and many which 
I shall not attempt to answer, for it would be in vain. Here 
let me say that I have no more reason to hope that I can re- 
move all the objections to this doctrine in the mind of an 
unregenerate Arminian than I could remove all the objec- 
tions and dislike in the carnal heart to the doctrine of the 
sovereignty of God in a sinner's salvation. The carnal heart, 
which is enmity against God, has constitutional objections to 
both doctrines, because they humble its pride, and leave it in 
the dust — they rob it of its works. 

1st Objection. " Angels in heaven have fallen." We have 
nothing to do with angels ; they do not live under the same 
dispensation, and Christ never died for them. 

2d Objection. "Adam fell." And he rose again; and, 
therefore, he fell not beyond God's grace. Nor did he live in 
the dispensation that we do, nor was he in the new covenant 
prior to his fall. He was under " a covenant of works." 
God had created him innocent, and he was to do and live — 
remain upright by obedience, and live innocently before God. 

3d Objection. In Ezek. iii. 20 : " When a righteous man 
doth turn from his righteousness and commit iniquity, * * 
he shall die in his sin, and his righteousness which he hath 
done shall not be remembered." 

Ans. In the discussion of this question, we have nothing 
to do with the Old Testament, or covenant. That was a 
covenant of works, which every soul of Israel, from the 
greatest to the least, from the king upon his throne to the 
peasant, and from the high priest at its altars down to the 
humblest worshipper; which Moses, its first lawgiver, the 
meekest man who ever lived ; which Aaron, its first high 
priest ; which David, a man after God's own heart, and 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 523 

Solomon, divinely inspired with wisdom, all brake. Its con- 
ditions were, obey and live ; a long life and temporal pros- 
perity — not heaven — were its only rewards ; disobey and die, 
temporally, not eternally — die 'prematurely — lose temporal 
blessings. Moses had sinned, and he was not allowed to 
pass over Jordan ; he was cut off before his eye had become 
dim, or his natural strength abated ; the righteousness which 
he had done did not avail him and Aaron. But they were 
not lost. God was displeased with that old faulty covenant 
of works — and why 1 because it did not make fhe partici- 
pants of it perfect ; because all under it departed from God 
continually — none in the flesh could keep it. 

Therefore, says Paul, " But now hath he obtained a more 
excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of 
a better covenant, which was established upon better prom- 
ises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, then 
should no place have been sought for the second. For find- 
ing fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith 
the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house 
of Israel and with the house of Judah: not according to the 
covenant that I made with their fathers, in the day when I 
took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of 
Egypt ; because they continued not in my covenant, and I 
regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant 
that I will make with the house of Israel, after those clays, 
saith the Lord: I will put my laws into their mind, and 
write them in their hearts ; and I will be to them a God, 
and they shall be to me a people. And they shall not teach 
every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, 
Know the Lord : for all shall know me, from the least to the 
greatest. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, 
and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. 
In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. 



524 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

Now that which decay eth and waxeth old, is ready to vanish 
away." (Heb. viii. 6-13.) 

Here are some of the promises of this new covenant : 
" And I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that 
I will not turn away from them to do them good; but I will 
put my fear into their hearts, that they shall not depart from 
me. And they shall be my people, and I will be their God ; 
and I will give them one heart, and one way that they may 
fear me for ever, for the good of them, and of their children 
after them." 

I, therefore, am justified, in affirming, that every soul, 
every person once introduced into this new, this better, this 
everlasting covenant, will and must remain in it, and enjoy 
its blessings for ever, even though he sins through the weak- 
ness of the flesh, as all do. 

The new di tiers from the old covenant in this : God was 
one of the contracting parties of that, but man, in his weak- 
ness and poverty of merit, was, alone and without a surety, 
the other; he was not able to meet the demands of the 
law, and the covenant was broken. In the new covenant, 
God is again one of the contracting parties, and man, in. his 
weakness, still the other. But a help is found for him ; 
Christ offers to become his Surety, so that wherein he fails, 
as he must and will, through the weakness of the flesh, the 
law looks to his Surety. Thus we have a covenant based 
upon " better promises." It is and must be everlasting ; for 
God is upon one side, and Christ, with and for his children, 
on the other. " By so much was Jesus made a Surety of a 
better covenant." The Old Testament is, therefore, dis- 
missed from this discussion. 

4th Objection. " In many passages in the New Testament, 
the apostacy and ruin of a Christian is supposed, which is 
thought would not be the case, unless it were at least possible, 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 525 

not to say probable. For instance, Heb. vi. 46, and Heb. x. 
26-29." 

It is admitted that the violation of the covenant, on his 
part, is supposed ; and the certain and awful consequences 
of such a violation declared — that they would be remediless 
and hopeless. But it must be granted that it is only sup- 
posed ; and it also must be admitted that there is not a 
passage in the whole of the New Testament that declares 
that a child of God can or will apostatize and be lost, unless 
the passages in which it is hypothecated teach it. While, 
on the other hand, not only the nature of Christ's atonement, 
the nature of the work of regeneration unchangeably wrought 
in the heart, and the conditions of the new covenant, and the 
whole scheme of recovering grace preclude the idea of such 
an apostacy ; but, in addition to all this, there are scores of 
passages in the New Testament which positively and unequiv- 
ocally teach that no one who truly believeth on Christ w T ill 
ever come into condemnation ; that not one of all given to 
him will be lost, and not a sheep will or can be plucked 
out of his hands. 

But, to declare that the bare fact that the final apostacy of 
a Christian is supposed fully establishes the fact or the fear 
that such an occurrence may or will take place, proves too 
much, for it will establish other doctrines fully as subversive 
of the plan of salvation, and fully as dangerous to believe 
as this. Let me instance a few cases. Gal. i. 7 : " But 
though we or an angel from heaven preach any other gospel 
unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him 
be accursed." 

Are we therefore to conclude that Paul intended to teach 
the Galatians that possibly himself or the other inspired apos- 
tles, and even an angel from heaven — not hell — might preach 
a different gospel than the Holy Ghost had enabled them to 



526 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

preach 1 Who is wedded to the doctrine of apostacy with 
such a love that he will grant this doctrine in order to up- 
hold that ? Again, 

" If in this life only we have hope in Christ we f.re of all 
men the most miserable." 

Did Paul mean that possibly it might turn out they had 
hope in this life only ? 

But some one may say, " The possibility of apostacy is 
several times supposed." Very well, let us try the strength 
of this plea : 

"And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain." 

" For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised." 

" If so be that the dead rise not." 

"And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching in vain." 

" But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is not 
Christ risen." 

" If the dead rise not at all." 

"If, after the manner of men, I have fought with beasts 
at Ephesus, what ad vantage th it me if the dead rise not at 
all?" 

Thus, in one solitary chapter, the non-resurrection of the 
dead is hypothecated no less than five times, and the non-res- 
urrection of Christ directly twice ! Does it follow that the 
doctrine of the resurrection is to be questioned % The apos" 
tacy of a believer is not supposed so many times. " Why 
should any fact or doctrine be supposed, if there were no 
possibility of its being true?" I have shown you, if you 
believe the Bible, that it is as much your duty as mine to 
answer that question. 

Doubtless it was for the purpose of instruction, and to 
show what conclusions would inevitably follow from certain 
premises, or seal some fact forcibly upon the mind. 

Touching the resurrection, we are taught that just so cer- 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 527 

tainly as that Christ rose from the dead, so certainly the dead 
mil rise, and vice versa. Paul wished to impress upon the 
wavering Galatians, the fact that he had, by divine authority 
and power, preached unto them the true gospel — for any 
other would be a lie, preached by apostles or angels. Paul 
wished to teach the Hebrews the infinite superiority of the 
sacrifice and atonement of Christ over those of the law. Thus, 

The sacrifices of the law made not those for whom they 
were offered perfect — sanctified them not for ever — and there- 
fore had to be repeatedly offered ; they only served to bring 
sin to remembrance ; but 

The sacrifice of Christ for ever perfects all those sanctified 
by it ; and moreover, it being himself, who could die but 
once, consequently it could be offered but once. Proof: 

" By the which will [t. e., covenant] we are sanctified, 
through the offering of the body of Christ once — " the " for 
all" are added words, as any one can see. 

" But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, 
for ever sat down on the right hand of God.'" 

" For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that 
are sanctified," i. e., those for whom it is once offered. 

"And as it is appointed unto man once to die, and after 
this the judgment, so Christ was offered to bear the sins of 
many," &c. 

Now, what conclusion follows from this, that serves also 
to elucidate it ? This : that should one — you may say, could 
one — of those sanctified by this precious blood of Christ 
violate his covenant, or fall back to his first estate, then there 
could be no more sacrifice for him — no second application 
of Christ's blood — no repentance — no possible salvation. 

But will you say, because the apostle supposes such a 
case, that he meant to teach that it was possible for one re- 
deemed to become unredeemed, or for one once sanctified 



528 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

by the application of Christ's blood to his heart, to become 
unsanctified 1 Who says it, declares that the language of 
Paul, from the sixth to the eleventh chapter of Hebrews, is 
solecistical and contradictious ; that he stultifies his teach- 
ings ; that he denies in one verse what he teaches in the next ! 
And who loves the possibility of a believer's ultimate apos- 
tacy so madly as to assert this 1 

Mark my proof: Paul distinctly asserts the superiority of 
the new covenant over the old, because it had a better priest- 
hood, and 

"A sacrificer of nobler name 
And richer blood " 

than had the bestial sacrifices of the law. Observe, with 
thankfulness and rejoicing of heart, wherein the sacrifice of 
Christ is better : 

1. " But by his own blood he entereth into the holy place, 
having obtained eternal redemption for ws." The blood of 
bulls could not obtain this. 

2. It " purges our consciences from dead works, to serve 
the living God," and this for ever. The blood of the old 
only served to purify the flesh, and the people departed from 
God. 

3. " By means of his death, they which are called receive 
the promise of an eternal inheritance. The blood of bulls and 
goats could not secure such an inheritance. 

4. By his blood the sins of the recipient are for.ever put 
away ; he is sealed by it as one of the members of the new 
covenant, of whom it is said, " their sins and their iniquities 
will I remember no more ;" they are all henceforth imputed 
to Christ, who ever liveth to intercede for them. The old 
sacrifices could not for ever put away sins, and were repeat- 
edly offered. 

5. The blood of Christ perfects, not for six months — not 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 529 

simply from one revival excitement to another — but perfects 
for ever all those to whom it is once applied, and this the 
blood of goats could not do. 

Then, for these five considerations, there is no need for a 
second offering, for the sins of God's children are all remit- 
ted and for ever put away from them ; and the apostle says, 
" Now, where remission of these is, there is no more offering 
for sin." The eternal salvation of every blood-washed soul 
is secured — it is sealed unto the day of redemption. 

Now, to say that such a soul can become unsanctified, and 
need again the application of Christ's blood to it, is to 
say that the offering of the blood of Christ is no better than 
that of bulls ; for it did not, more than they, for ever put 
away sin — did not perfect for ever those sanctified by it. 
It would be saying that the offering of Christ was not equal 
to the offerings of the law, for these could be offered again 
and again for the offender, while that of Christ could not be. 
Thus does this doctrine of repeated and intermittent regen- 
eration drive at the perfect and finished atonement of Christ 
— thus does it openly dash against and secretly undermine 
the rock-based pillar which bears up the salvation of a lost 
and sinking world.* 

" Not as the world the Saviour gives ; 
He's an unchanging friend ; 
"Whom once he loves, he never leaves, 
But loves him to the end. 

Else Satan might full victory boast ; 

The Church might wholly fall ; 
If one believer may be lost, 

Thetis surely, so may allP 

* Those who wish to see this subject discussed at length by the au- 
thor, are referred to a tract on Apostacy, published by the Tennessee 
Publication Society. 
26 



i 



530 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

It is urged that the doctrine of " once in grace, always in 
grace" is of most baneful tendency. Methodists have been 
heard to say, " Why, if I just knew I would go to heaven 1 
would take my fill of sin." This declaration is enough to show 
that the love of sin has never been crucified in that heart ; that 
it is still alive to sin, and delights in sin, more than in God, 
and has joined the class just to keep out of hell ! and such 
a soul is undoubtedly on the broad way to hell. Zeno, when 
asked, " Wherein does your philosophy make you better citi- 
zens," replied, " If all the laws were abolished, we would 
live as we now do." Ought not the religion of Christ — his 
regenerating grace — do as much for us as heathen philosophy 
did for its followers 1 

Suppose the young wife say, " If I only knew that my 
husband would not cease to love me, or turn me out of his 
house, I would take my fill of sin." Would she betray a 
very ardent attachment for her husband, or a pure or virtu- 
ous heart ? I maintain that this doctrine is the mainspring 
of all Christian zeal and activity — of all good works in the 
sight of God. 

When do Christians pray most, praise most, give most, 
labor most, talk to sinners most and with tears in their eyes, 
sacrifice most to extend the kingdom of Christ, live most 
consistently, let their light shine most, and glorify God most % 

" When they can read their titles clear 
To mansions in the skies." 

The Workings and Tendency of the Doctrine of Apos- 
tacy and Re-regeneration. 

Doctrines, like trees, may be known by their fruits. What 
ever may be affirmed to the contrary, the doctrine that a 
man can tMregenerate himself rests upon the ground that he 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 531 

can regenerate himself, for it implies the same power. The 
Ethiopian who can change his skin to pearly white can as 
easily change it to yellow, and back again to its native black- 
ness, and vice versa. As we might expect, a system of works 
enters largely into the means preached for the sinner to at- 
tain justification, and works are most rigidly urged as the 
means by which the Christian is to keep himself in a state 
of regeneration. Would you be fully satisfied of this % 
Study calmly and dispassionately, if you can, one Methodist 
camp-meeting, or one "excitement" or ''revival." Listen 
to the character of the preaching; the doctrines advanced; 
observe all the multiform and questionable appliances and 
ingenious expedients brought into requisition. The pulpit or 
stand is a Mount Sinai hung with the blackness of dark- 
ness, crested with fire, and shaken with thunderings, and 
wreathed with fierce lightnings ; wrath and fury, " hell-fire 
and damnation" are the themes of sermon and exhortation. 
The membership must be aroused to action. The preacher 
says he wants to hear " a shout raised in the camp of Israel" 
— that the walls of Jericho never fell down until Israel raised 
the shout ; and he never knew any thing done until some sis- 
ter " got happy" " Lord, make these sisters here shouting 
happy, right now." What appeals follow upon this to the 
passions — to the affections and fears ! What scenes are de- 
picted of dying fathers, dying mothers, dying children and 
infants (violent sobbings), death-scenes, hell-scenes (a lady 
faints here, and another screams), and judgment-scenes — 
friends in heaven meeting fathers and mothers there, meet- 
ing children, and the dear little babes lost, there ! Hear that 
shout — (has the Lord answered the prayer Vj — and another — 
and another ; and now it becomes general — the preacher's 
voice rises like trumpet-tone over all — "Fire ! fire ! Send 



532 THE GKEAT IRON WHEEL. 

down fi-re !'• " Baptize all this congregation in the Holy 
Ghost and fi-re." " Po-wer ! power — come in thy mighty 
pow-er !" Now, the excitement being at the right stage, 
the straw being prepared, the door of the altar is thrown open, 
and sinners are called upon to come forward before they 
drop into hell. In the midst of the uproar, parents drag 
their excited and terrified children into the altar, and others 
from alarm, others from pure nervous excitement, and others 
from sympathy, rush forward ; the altar is crowded. Now 
follows what some preachers call a " sanctified row.'''' The 
mourners are exhorted to pray mightily — and a season of 
prayer commences. A brother who has a strong voice is 
called upon to pray, and all the mourners are exhorted to pray 
at once, and all Christians to pray — call mightily upon God. 
And who can describe the scene that follows for the next half- 
hour — men and women, girls and boys, of all ages, are min- 
gled and commingled in one conglomerated mass in the 
straw, rolling and tumbling, and throwing their arms and 
limbs about in every conceivable direction; forty or fifty 
" mourners" crying, screaming, praying — a hundred Christ- 
ians, "all engaged," some praying, some shouting, some 
swooning, some with the powers ; the shrill voice of the 
leader ever and anon rising above the din, calling for "fire," 
"power!" and the ministers shouting the loud and deep 
"A-men! a-men! do, Lord! Hallelujah !" This lasts until 
ten or eleven, with the simple variation of a song instead of 
a prayer, when the noise, uproar and confusion is, if possi- 
ble, far greater ! This is no fancy sketch ; it falls far below 
the sad and awful reality as all will bear me witness. I 
appeal to the world, from which all reason and common 
sense has not departed — except during one of these " re- 
vivals ;" I appeal to all candid, reflecting men and Christians, 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 533 

is that altar a place for young children, or for old children, 
or for an humble inquirer to think rationally, scripturally ? 
Do they know what they are about % They were invited for- 
ward as inquirers, to be instructed — have they heard a word % 
— can they distinguish a solitary connected sentence % And 
see tljere — how those ministers are beating them upon their 
backs as though religion was a wedge to be driven in be- 
tween the shoulder-blades ! This is no fiction. Mourners 
have been driven from the altar by the force of these blows, 
and left with more bruised backs than hearts. The preach- 
ers and their kind friends were excited, and did not know 
how hard they did slap and pound them. This meeting, or 
camp, continues three or four days ; some few of these pro- 
fess, and the class-leader is in the altar the last day, and asks 
all who want to go to heaven, to let him put their names 
down on his little book — that he " wants them all to be seek- 
ers — and the Methodist Church is just the place in which 
to seek religion — thousands have professed religion in the 
Methodist Church." He gets their names, and then the meet- 
ing closes. The week following, you can read a piece of 
i ' revival news" in the Methodist Advocate : — 

"Dear Bro. McFerrin : — The Lord has powerfully revived 
his work on this circuit. At our camp-meeting, which has 
just closed, one hundred and thirty joined the society, several 
of whom were powerfully converted ! The ' old ship' is 
again afloat here." 

In about six months after the camp-meeting, these young 
converts and seekers, having become wilder and wickeder 
than ever, a " revival meeting" is gotten up, when the same 
state of things observed at the camp-meeting are acted over 
again ; and at the close of this, perhaps, the larger portion of 
these seekers are brought out — induced to profess regenera- 



534 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

tion. They honestly think they are regenerated — they are 
told so. They join again, and another flaming report appears 
in the paper ! The reader would think the whole neighbor- 
hood had been converted and joined the Methodist Church. 
From three weeks to three months the majority profess un- 
regeneration — they have forgotten their fears, and their ex- 
citement has worn off, and they return to their old forsaken 
sins, " like a dog to eat up his vomit, or a sow that was 
washed to her wallowing in the mire." 

Now, how many times can these be regenerated over, 
getting worse and worse, harder and harder, from each 
"fall," before they will become outright and downright in- 
fidels in the reality of spiritual regeneration, or join the 
Church, believing what is preached to them from the pulpit, 
and exhorted to them in the class, " if they expect to go to 
heaven they must work their own passage" — i. e., observe 
the rules ; and thus they go aboard Mr. Wesley's ship, to work 
their passage ! Is it strange they believe in justification by 
works? Do we not see how vitally essential the doctrine 
of apostacy is to such preaching and expedients — to fit such 
machinery for making Christians. If any think I have col- 
ored my figures, I invite their attention to the following 
table of statistics published in the Southern Christian Advo- 
cate, a Methodist paper ; and the facts were furnished by a 
Methodist preacher too, I expect. He founded an argument 
upon them against the non-pastorate policy, but I urge them 
in proof that these modern baptisms of fire and sanctified 
rows are not revivals of pure and undefiled religion — that 
Methodist revivals are solemn farces. . 

This Methodist says these figures note the result of four 
different meetings, and he was in each of them. 

" Of those who joined our Church, 204 in number, the fol- 
lowing table will indicate their ultimate destiny : 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 535 





Males. 


Females. 


Total. 


" Methodists, 


24 


64 


88 


Backsliders, 


. 45 


13 


58 


Presbyterians, 


2 


14 


16 


Baptists, . 


. 4 


4 


8 


Episcopalians, 





1 


1 


Unknown, 


. 3 


30 


33 



78 126 204 

" Here we have, of 171 original members, only 88 remain- 
ing and living and dying with us, 58 gone back to the world, 
and 25 joined other communions." 

Here, of the 204 reported converts, we find only 88 left 
in the society at this writing — and how many of them are 
still there only as seekers he does not say — and 91 gone back 
to the world. These figures offer food for reflection. 

But does not this intermitted regeneration doctrine tend to 
make infidels 1 So far as my observation teaches me it does. 

During a meeting in the town of S (in no respect 

like the one described above) I approached a young lady 
who was bathed in tears and in evident distress of mind. 
I inquired for the cause of her grief. She told me that she 
felt that she was a poor lost sinner — that a sense of her 
sins and depravity was crushing her heart. I spoke to her 
of Jesus, who invited just such as her to come. " Oh," said 
she, " I've got religion five or six times, and lost it, and I am 
afraid I should lose it if I should get it again ;" and there was 
an outburst of desponding grief. " Mary," I replied, "Mary, 
you have been deceived — you have never yet known any 
thing about religion. Let it get you, and it will keep you." 
I reasoned away her doubts and despair, and she appeared, 
from that day, among the inquirers for religious instruction 



536 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

and prayer. Before the meeting closed she professed a hope 
in Christ. " Oh, sir," said she, " if this be religion I never 
knew any thing about it before." Years have passed, and 
as often as I see her in visiting the place, I inquire, " Well, 
Mary, can you keep your religion? have you not lost it 
yet?" "You were right sir, it keeps me — I feel that / am 
kept. This is the religion I always wanted." 

In a revival in the city of the arm of the Lord 

was revealed in bringing many souls to Christ. The inquir- 
ers were numerous, and the congregations solemn. I be- 
came deeply interested in the son of a deacon of the Church, 
but I saw no signs of interest on his part. As the meeting 
was drawing to a close, I went to him in the congregation, 
and conversed with him ; told him of my interest for him ; 
warned him of his danger ; portrayed the love of the Saviour 
for the guilty and lost — the work of regeneration on the 
heart — the joys of religion — the peace of a believer. 
When I paused for some sign of emotion, he turned up his 
eye with a sort of indescribable smile of incredulity. " You 
can't tell me any thing about it, sir — I have been through it 
all several times ; I know all about it, and I can't be gotten 
into it again — it's of no use to talk to me." I saw the exact 
state of the case. He was, in heart, a confirmed infidel ; he 
was a disbeliever in regeneration of heart — in the Christian 
religion; he had been galvanized a halfa-dozen times; he 
had belonged to the Church or society — had even again and 
again eaten the Lord's Supper with Christians (if indeed the 
table at which you eat can be considered the Lord's) ; he had 
related his feelings in the class, and been told that he was 
a Christian indeed; and it all gradually left him as the ex- 
citement that produced it died away ; his heart wa? 
where it ever was — unregenerate — ay, worse —hardened 
into cold unbelief and infidelity, and his damnation sealed. 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 537 

These are not isolated cases, but simply types of the thou- 
sands and tens of thousands that fill the land. Go ask that 
universalist, that blasphemer, that outrageously wicked man 
who appears lost to all shame, that infidel, if they never 
thought of religion, and nine out of ten of them will tell you 
they have been regenerated from twice to five times, and 
are only fallen from grace ! Satisfy yourself as I have, and 
then learn that this doctrine of intermittent regeneration — 
this losing religion and getting it again, and losing it and 
getting it every three or six months, has made, and is mak- 
ing, more infidels — more unbelievers in spiritual regenera- 
tion — more despisers and rejectors of the Christian religion — 
more hopelessly hardened sinners, than Tom Paine's Age of 
Reason and all the works of the Erench atheists. Every 
man w r ho understands the first principles of the philosophy 
of the mind knows that infidelity is the logical consequence 
of the process. 

Positive Scriptures against the Possibility op the 
Apostacy of a Believer. 

I proposed to submit a few passages of Scripture that un- 
questionably preclude the idea of a believer's final apostacy ; 
and my argument is, if that doctrine is claimed to be true 
because it is hypothecated, then are the teachings of the 
Scripture contradictious. My limits allow me to give but a 
few. 

The strong man armed and the stronger than he. — "No 
man can enter into a strong man's house and spoil his goods, 
except he first bind the strong man ; and then he will spoil 
his house." (Mark. iii. 27.) 

" When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods 
are in peace, but when a stronger than he shall come upon 
him and overcome him, he taketh from him all his armor 
23* 



538 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils." (Luke xi. 
21, 22. 

Who can bind and cast out the stronger than the strong 
man armed 1 

The joy of angels. — " Likewise I say unto you, there is 
joy in the presence of the angels of God, over one sinner 
that repenteth." How can we understand this if the Christ- 
ian, falls from grace 1 ? Would there not be folly in such 
joy 1 Would it not be premature 1 Have they not learned, 
in watching the history of the Church 6000 years, to suspend 
their joy till the tried spirit of the saint mounts up in tri- 
umph to glory 1 (Luke xv. 10.) 

The Saviour's prayer. — Neither pray I for these alone, 
but for them also who shall believe on me through their 
word ; that they all may be one ; as thou, Father, art in me, 
and I in thee, that they may also be one in us, that the world 
may believe that thou hast sent me, and the glory which 
thou givest me / have given them ; that they may be one even 
as we are one ; I in them, and thou in me, that they may be 
made perfect in one. Father, I will that they also whom 
thou hast given me be with me where I am, that they may 
behold my glory which thou hast given me. I pray not 
that thou shouldst take them out of the world, but that thou 
shouldst keep them from the evil." (John. xvii. 15, 20,24.) 

Can the union between the Father and the Son be dissolved? 
Can the devil sow dissension and coldness between the 
Father and the Son so that they will depart the one from 
the other % Can it be supposed that the Son will ever wish to 
sever his connection with the Father? Then, if the Saviour's 
prayer is answered, the union between himself and the least 
one of his children cannot, and will not, be dissolved. The 
redeemed soul will not wish to leave, the devil cannot pluck 
it away, and Christ will never, no never forsake. 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 

"God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted 
above that ye are able, but will with the temptation also 
make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it." 
(1 Cor. x. 13.) 

" The soul that on Jesus hath leaned for repose — 
I will not, I will not desert to its foes. 
That soul, though all hell should endeavor to shake, 
I'll never, no never, no never forsake." 

Religion is an anchor that parts not in the day of trial. 
— " That by two immutable things in which it was impossi^ 
ble for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who 
have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us, 
which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and 
steadfast, and which entereth into that within the veil." 
(Heb. vi. 18, 19.) 

The sinner is tried and condemned but once. — " There is 
therefore no condemnation to them which are in Christ 
Jesus, who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit, for 
the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free 
from the law of sin and death." (Rom. viii. 1, 2.) 

" For ye have not received the Spirit of bondage again to 
fear; but ye have received the spirit of adoption, whereby 
we cry, " Abba, Father" [Our Father]. The Spirit itself 
beareth witness with our spirits that we are the children of 
God ; and if children then heirs ; heirs of God, and joint 
heirs with Christ. (Rom. viii. 15-17.) 

" That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but 
have everlasting life." (John iii. 15, 16, 36.) 

" Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that heareth my word, 
and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and 
shall never come into condemnation ; but is passed from 
death unto life. (John. v. 24.) 



540 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

The implanted love of Christ unfailing. — u Love [falsely 
translated charity] never faileth; but whether there be 
prophecies they shall fail ; whether there be tongues they 
shall cease ; whether there be knowledge it shall vanish 
away. 

" And now abideth faith, hope, love, these three ; but the 
greatest of these is love. (1 Cor. xiii. 8, 13.) 

Christ the tree of life — the bread and water of life. 
— : 'This is the bread that cometh down from heaven, that a 
man may eat thereof and not die. 1 am the living bread 
which came down from heaven ; if any man eat of this bread 
he shall live for ever. 

"Whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eter- 
nal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. (John vi. 
37-54.) 

" He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth 
in me, and I in him." 

"As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father, 
so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. This is that 
bread which came down from heaven ; not as your fathers 
did eat manna and are dead ; he that eateth of this bread 
shall live for ever." 

" Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again, but 
whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him, shall 
never thirst ; but the water that I shall give him shall be in- 
him a well of water springing up into everlasting life." 
(Johniv. 13, 14.) 

The Christian a conqueror. — "All that the Father giveth 
me shall come to me ; and him that cometh to me I will in no 
wise cast out." 

"And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one 
which seeth the Son and believeth on him may have everlast- 
ing life ; and I will raise him up at the last day." 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 541 

" No man can come unto me except the Father who hath 
sent me draw him ; and I will raise him up at the last day." 

"For whosoever is born of God overcometh the world." 
(1 John v. 4.) 

" The sinner who, by precions faith, 
Has felt his sins forgiven, 
Is from that moment passed from death, 
And sealed an heir of heaven. 

Ten thousand snares surround his feet, — 

Not one shall hold him fast ; 
Whatever dangers he may meet, 

He'll overcome at last." 

Christ the Christian's life. — " Ye are dead, and your life 
is hid with Christ in God ; and when Christ who is our life 
shall appear, then shall we also appear with him. in glory." 

"Because I live, ye shall live also." (John xiv. 19.) 

Regeneration will prompt obedience. — "If a man love me 
he will keep my words, and my Father will love him, and 
we will come unto him and make our abode with him." 
(John xiv. 23.) 

Some profess to love, but fall away and go back to the 
world. Were they Christians 1 

" They went out from us, but they were not of us, for if 
they had been of us they would have continued with us, but 
that they might be made manifest that they were not all of 
us." (1 Johnii. 19.) 

The words "no doubt" were inserted by the translator. 

The Christian is not of those who draw back unto perdition. 
— " But we are not of those who draw back unto perdition, 
but of them who believe to the saving of the soul." (Heb. 
x. 39.) 

JVo Christian act can be forgotten. — " For God is not un- 
righteous to forget your work and your labor of love which 



542 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 

ye have showed toward his name, that ye have ministered 
to the saints and do minister." (Heb. vi. 10.) 

" Whosoever shall give to drink unto one of these little 
ones a cup of cold water in the name of a disciple, verily I 
say unto you he shall in no wise lose his reward." 

Now, if a person fall from grace and be sent to hell, how 
can this be true 1 When, or where, or how, would he be 
rewarded ? 

The Seed is planted only in the heart where it is designed 
to live and abide for ever. 1 Peter i. 23: "Born again of 
incorruptible seed, which liveth and abideth for ever.'''' 

The Christian not an unfinished tower. — "For which of you, 
intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first and count- 
eth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it % Lest, 
haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to 
finish it, all that behold it begin to mock, saying, This man 
began to build, and was not able to finish." (Luke xiv. 28.) 

" Being confident of this very thing, that he who hath be- 
gun a good work in you will perform it [i. e., perfect — con- 
tinue to perfect it] until the day of Jesus Christ." (Phil. i. 6.) 

The Christian's a sure foundation. — " Behold, I lay in 
Zion, for a foundation, a stone, a tried stone, a precious 
corner-stone, a sure foundation ; he that believeth shall not 
make haste." 

" Therefore, whosoever heareth these sayings of mine and 
doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man who built his 
house upon a rock; and the rain descended, and the floods 
came, and the winds blew and beat upon that house, and it 
fell not, for it was founded upon a rock." 

Mark, this man's house did not stand because he stood out 
in the storm and rain and held it up, but because it was 
founded upon the rock. Christ is the Rock of ages. We 
build upon him by faith in his blood, resting all our hopes 



CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 543 

of salvation upon his righteousness alone. All other founda- 
tions are sand. 

" Now, therefore, ye are no more strangers [not one of 
them who is a spiritual member — a living stone — ever will 
be a stranger again, or alienated], but fellow-citizens with the 
saints, and of the household of God, and are built upon the 
foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ being the 
chief corner-stone, in whom all the building, fitly framed to- 
gether [every member of this spiritual temple is indissolubly 
framed into Christ !], groweth into an holy temple in the 
Lord,m whom ye also are builded together for an habitation 
of God through the Spirit." (Eph. ii. 19, 20.) 

Surely, 

" Their rock is not as our rock, even our enemies being 
judges. (Dan. xxxii. 31.) 

Well may we sing — 

" How firm a foundation, ye saints of the Lord, 
Is laid for your hopes in his excellent word ! 
What more could he say than to you he hath said — 
You who unto Jesus for refuge have fled ?" * 

* I affectionately request all who are acquainted with a passage of 
Scripture which they think teaches the doctrine of a believer's apos- 
tasy and ruin, or who have an argument which they consider valid, 
in favor of it, or an objection against the contrary doctrine, to com- 
municate such passages, arguments, or objections, to me, that they 
may be noticed, not only in the paper, but in a forthcoming book on 
Apostasy, its Grounds, and its Evils. 



LETTER XL 



PRIMITIVE CHURCH CONSTITUTION. 

Lest it be said that I hare pulled clown, but have put up nothing 
to take the place of what I have demolished, I have hastily drawn up 
the following Declaration of Rights, and the most prominent Articles 
of a Primitive. Church Constitution, which I believe to be most indis- 
putably taught in the New Testament. 

That these principles can be found together, embodied in speci- 
fic Articles, in any one chapter in the New Testament, I do not claim ; 
nor can the Apostle's Creed or the acknowledged Articles of Evangel- 
ical Faith ; but, like these, they run through the whole body of the 
teachings of Christ and his apostles ; and I do maintain that the prin- 
ciples of Church constitution, order, and discipline are as clearly and 
specifically taught as are the doctrines which Christian churches are 
to hold and teach. Therefore men— Church rulers — have no more 
right to invent forms of Church government to please their own fancy, 
than to invent doctrines, regardless of the teachings of Christ and his 
apostles. 

The following Constitution is not submitted as a perfect one. It is 
only a first rude draft to illustrate my position above, and may here- 
after be given to the public in a more perfect and permanent form. 

The Christian Bible-reader will find it a pleasant and profitable em- 
ployment to study the teachings of "Christ and bis apostles, with ref- 
erence to this subject, and see wherein he can amend these Articles, 
or strengthen them with scriptural authority. 
(544) 



CHRISTIANITY DIRECT. 545 

DECLARATION OF RIGHTS. 

We hold these facts to be unquestionable : — 

1. That God has given to all men, for their welfare and happiness, 
certain natural and inalienable rights, which he designed not himself 
to abrogate,* or for man to concede, or tyrants to usurp. 

2. That God can therefore be the author of no government, civil or 
ecclesiastical, which denies to man the exercise of the indefeasible 
rights vouchsafed to him in the charter of his creation. 

3. That these (or man's natural) rights cannot be usurped, or their 
exercise denied him by State or Church rulers, without manifest im- 
piety. 

4. That in civil society, while the exercise of these rights may be 
modified, they cannot be conceded without sin. 

5. That touching man's moral and religious duties as an individual 
or as a subject of Christ's kingdom, he must look alone to Christ as 
the only sovereign whom he is to reverence, the only master whom 
he is to serve, and the only king and lawgiver whom he is to obey. 

6. That while the constitution and laws of a Christian Church are 
determined by Christ, who is the only king in Zion, yet the supreme 
judicial and executive powers for the administration of Church govern- 
ment are invested in the membership : each member having an identity 
of interest, of responsibility, and consequently of power. 

We also hold these truths to be self-evident : — 

1. That since Christianity is a revealed religion, the government of 
the Church must be instituted by God, and, since he can be the au- 
thor of no government which denies to man the gifts of his Creator, 
and thus contravenes the wisdom of God in the bestowment of those 
gifts, that therefore Christianity secures to man the possession and 
exercise of all his natural rights. 

2. That if it is claimed that any natural right is denied to man 
in the Church, as the election of his teachers, the usurper is bound 
to prove it by an appeal to Scriptures that positively forbid to man 
the exercise of that right. 

3. That, therefore, man cannot justly be called upon, to produce 
Scriptures which expressly command him to exercise any natural right 



* It is admitted that God has a right to deny to man or to nations the exercise of 
these rights aa a punishment. 



546 REPUBLICANISM AND 

in the Church, since its exercise must be granted him until it can be 
demonstrated that the Scriptures, by positive enactment,. deny him the 
exercise of that right. 

We hold these rights to be from man inalienable, by the charter of 
his creation : — 

1st. Freedom, social, civil, and religious. Freedom of thought, 
and the expression of thought, publicly and privately, unrestrained 
freedom of action, when thought and action do not infringe upon 
the rights of others. 

2d. Equality of Rights, civil and religious, and the exercise op 
them. That man is, and can be only the equal of his contemporary, 
and hence the claim set up by Church and State tyrants, to a charter 
of superiority over their fellows, to be a privileged class, invested 
with a "divine right/' to usurp and wrest from man any of his natu- 
ral rights, is a false and impious claim. 

3d. The Election of his Rulers. That man, in all countries, and 
in all governments, ecclesiastical as well as civil, has the inalienable 
right to elect his rulers, who are in fact his servants, and therefore 
those rulers must be amenable to the people for the proper discharge 
of the duties intrusted to them. 

4th. The Choice of his Teachers. As it is man's indefeasible 
right in the State, to select and elect his civil and scientific teachers 
and instructors, it must be granted to be his right andduty to do so in 
the Church, unless it can be shown by the teachings of Christ and his 
apostles that the exercise of such a right and duty is expressly forbid- 
den. If a class of men may claim a divine right and call to preach 
and to teach, so have the members of Christ's Church the " divine 
right" to decide both what shall be taught and who shall teach 
them. 

5th. To admit into, censure, punish, or expel members from all gov- 
ernments or voluntary associations, civil, scientific, and therefore re- 
ligious, according to the laws and disciplinary regulations of that 
government or association, and , therefore, no "divine right" is given, 
by "letters patent," to any man, or class of men, in Church, as the 
clergy or ruling elders, any more than, in State, as kings or emperors, 
to receive into, censure , punish, or expel from the government or so- 
ciety whomsoever they please, censure for what cause they please, 
try as they please, and expel when they please. Such a government 
would be a crushing and degrading despotism. 



CHRISTIANITY DIRECT. 547 

We hold it to be the personal and bounden duty of every account- 
able person, 

To acknowledge and serve God — believe in, and obey Jesus Christ 
— to be immersed upon a profession of that faith — to unite with a 
Christian Church— to participate in the Lord's Supper — and to labor 
for the glory of God and the extension of the Redeemer's kingdom, 
according to the teachings of Christ ; but since these are man's indi- 
vidual duties, and required at his hands as acts of personal obedience 
and service, in proof of the love and loyalty of his heart, no one of 
them can be performed for him by another, in his unconsciousness 
more than in his consciousness — nor can an "indulgence" be granted 
to him by priest or Church to disobey any one of them altogether, or 
for any length of time. 

Touching the source of Church government, as well as of the laws 
and regulations by which that government is to be administered, we 
hold the following proposition is sustained by the New Testament, by 
reason, and by the practice of primitive churches. 

The teachings of Christ and of his apostles furnish sufficient prin- 
ciples by which to determine the peculiar form and structure of Church 
government, as well as all the laws and regulations necessary for its 
proper administration ; and that those teachings also determine the 
number of offices, and the relative rank, powers, and duties of its 
officers ; finally, that the first Church at Jerusalem, formed by the di- 
rections and under the eye of the Saviour, and the apostolic churches, 
organized by the apostles, are the authoritative models for the forma- 
tion of churches for all future time : a departure from which by a 
religious society is a forfeiture of its claims to be considered a Christ- 
ian Church, and involves its originators in the sin of impiety. 

PROOFS. 

" Go ye, therefore, disciple all nations, immersing them in the name 
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ; teaching them 
to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you." 

Comments. — This is a specific and therefore a restrictive command. 
It forbids those who act under it the doing of more or less than what is 
commanded, as the preaching of human philosophy, or speculation for 
the Gospel, or in connection with it. It forbids the baptism of any but 
believers, for no other character is specified. It forbids immersion in 



548 REPUBLICANISM AND 

the name of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. It forbids them to 
" teach for doctrine the commandments of men." It teaches that 
Christ had given all sufficient directions for the formation and govern- 
ment of churches. If it was incumbent upon the apostles or Christians, 
to organize churches, all the laws necessary for the internal regula- 
tion and discipline of his churches, as well as all Christian duties, 
must have been taught. 

If this is denied, then it is certain that the specific terms of this com- 
mission forbid those acting under it to organize churches at all, or to 
enact laws and regulations for the government of such, since it for- 
bids the apostles to teach for observance by Christians, as Christian 
duties, any thing which Christ had not previously commanded them ! 
Lest they might not recall all those teachings, or teach them in their 
relative order, Christ gave them the aid of the Holy Spirit. 

" Howbeit, when he, the Spirit of truth is come, he will guide you 
into all truth ; for he shall not speak of himself : but whatsoever he shall 
hear that shall he speak." 

11 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Spirit, whom the Father 
will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all 
things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." 

The teachings of the apostles, then, are the teachings of Christ, and 
they, with those of Christ, constitute a perfect directory to ministers 
of all they are to teach men to observe pertaining to Christianity, and 
consequently of all things pertaining to the formation and government 
of a Christian Church. So taught Paul. 

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for 
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness ; 
that the man of God may be perfect, and thoroughly furnished unto 
all good works." 

It was an essential part of the good works o'f Titus, as of ministers 
now, to preach, baptize disciples, and organize them into churches, 
under some form of government, and to teach them the laws and regula- 
tions by which they were to be governed. From what source was he 
to furnish himself with the proper doctrine to teach , and the needed 
reproofs, correction, and discipline to be administered? From the 
teachings of Paul and the other Scriptures in his possession. Paul 
could praise the Church at Corinth, because of its faithfulness in keep- 
ing the ordinances as he had instructed them to do. 

'•'Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things, \ 



CHRISTIANITY DIRECT. 549 

and keep the ordinances as I delivered them unto you." (1 Cor. 
xi. 2). 

In writing to the Hebrews, he asserts that Christ was as faithful, 
at least, in all his house — his Church — as was Moses, in respect to the 
patterning of the old tabernacle ; and the form and internal arrange- 
ment were the essential parts of its organization. And did Christ give 
no directions concerning the form and peculiar organization of his 
house (Church) ? Did he leave it to the fancies and caprices of men 
to build it one story or five — to make it an aristocracy, a monarchy, 
or a crushing despotism ? 

It is Christ's prerogative and office " to be head over all things to 
his Church, which is his body,'- 1 &c. ; and has he not determined the 
form of his body and the arrangement of his members ? He is also 
represented as the only King and Lawgiver in Zion. 

Was there a Church or kingdom of Christ in existence, prior to 
the day of Pentecost ? We maintain that there was, most unques- 
tionably. John called upon the Jews to repent because it had come — 
" Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come." This is the acknow- 
ledged rendering of the verb translated " is at hand." 

When Jesus began to preach, he declared that the kingdom of heaven 
had come. He declared that the law and " the prophets prophesied 
until John ; since that time, the kingdom of God is preached, and 
every man presseth into it." How could they press into the kingdom 
or organization that was not in existence ? 

; But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of 
God is come unto you." This explains the evident mistranslation in 
our version. The Pharisees inquired when the kingdom of God should 
come. He replied, " Neither shall they say lo, here ! or lo, there! for 
behold, the kingdom of God is," not within those wicked Pharisees, but 

among you," i. e., in your very midst, and ye cannot observe or per- 
ceive it, so great is your blindness ! He told them at another time, 
that " the publicans andharlots go into the kingdom of God before you." 

I could multiply similar proofs ; but I close this discussion with 
two simple but unanswerable arguments. 

The kingdom of God— of heaven— the Church of Christ, was in ex- 
istence prior to Christ's ascension and the day of Pentecost. 

A kingdom is a definite organization— a government. 

But there can be no organization or government without laws. 

Laws, again, determine the form and character of the government, 



550 republicanism and 

But no one has a right to enact the laws of a government but its 
supreme ruler, or rulers ; or of a kingdom, but its rightful king. 

Jesus Christ is the sole and supreme ruler in his government ; the 
only king in his Zion ; therefore, he himself must have organized and 
given a form of government to his Church, or kingdom, before his 
ascension, or the day of Pentecost. 

And, since we have his teaching, either from his own lips, or through 
the apostles, in the New Testament, therefore the New Testament 
contains the principles, laws, and directions, sufficient to determine the 
peculiar form of organization Christ intended for his churches to have, 
and we may also conclude, that the Church which Christ himself or- 
ganized in Jerusalem, is an authoritative model to be patterned after 
until the end of time. 

Another Argument. 

'• The institutes of a kingdom cannot be in existence before the king- 
dom itself is set up. The Lord's Supper was an institute of the king- 
dom of Christ before his death ; therefore the kingdom of Christ was 
set up before his death. 

" Did not a Church of Christ, called disciples, exist before the death 
of Christ ? What is a Church of Christ but a company of disciples of 
Christ ? Did not Christ direct an offended brother to tell this Church 
of the matter, if he could not settle it in private (before his death) ; 
and direct this Church to exclude the member so offending, if he would 
not hear the Church? How could such a direction be given, and no 
Church of Christ be in existence ? Therefore, the kingdom or Church 
of Christ existed before his death. 

" The first dawn of the morning belongs to the day. The kingdom 
of Christ began with the beginning of gospel preaching and ordinances, 
and when Christ the king was introduced to Israel." 

The Testimony of History. 

"The new churches everywhere formed themselves on the model of 
the mother Church at Jerusalem. — Giesseler, vol. i., § 29. 

u That form of the primitive churches which was derived from the 
Church of Jerusalem, erected and organized by the apostles them- 
selves, must be accounted divine. — Mosheim. vol. i. p. SI. 

u This Church [of Jerusalem], so constituted, is the acknowledged 
pattern or model, by which other Christian churches were formed. * * 






CHRISTIANITY LIRECT. 551 

Hierarchalists, with others, say the New Testament presents no 
settled form of Church government. But the Judean churches were 
considered as models by Paul, who praised the Thessalonians for fol- 
lowing their example : nor were the customs of different people allowed 
to influence churches in different provinces, but the teachers of reli- 
gion throughout the world were to follow Paul's example. This model 
imitated, occasioned a harmony in practice for 100 years. If there is 
no form, then the Scriptures cannot be a perfect rule of faith and 
practice ; each province, town, or society, may legislate without giving 
offence to the King of Zion ; and consequently, every age, from new 
customs, might have a new form of Church government. Yet Jesus 
Christ has forbidden any thing to be added to his word ; and one 
feature of the Man of Sin is, that he should " change laws in God's 
temple ; " but every plant not of scriptural authority shall be taken 
away, and every innovator in Christ's kingdom shall meet with his 
displeasure. The unity enjoined, the discipline established, the ex- 
ample left, and the accountability of each servant for his conduct in 
the service of God, prove there is a settled law for their guidance. 
j See " Maclean on the Commission," and " Glass's King of Martyrs." — 
Orchard's History of Foreign Baptists in all Ages, pp. 6, 7.* 

I conclude this discussion in the language of Wm. Hague, with the 
substitution of one or two words : 

" However honored may be the history of any Church on earth, how- 
ever far it may be extended, with whatever names it may be distin- 
guished and adorned, its pretence of being, as to its outward constitu- 
tion, the true Church of Christ, is nullified by the fact that it is a 
Church established by human device. So far as it is established by 
man, so far it is a part of a human system, and just so far, constitu- 
tionally considered, it has lost the character of a true Church of 
Christ. So that the mere fact that a Church is established by the 
legislation of a man, or men, furnishes a sufficient reason why Christ- 
ians should leave it, as having in its constitution those elements 
which are at war with the spiritual nature, the primary principles, and 
the-high moral ends of the Christian dispensation." — Chris. Statesman.] 



* See the reasonings ot John Milton, as quoted in Letter III., also additional 
reasonings. 

f This is an invaluable history, and should be in the library of every Christian 
man. It has been published by the Tennessee Publication Society, and can be had 

of the Agents, Nashville, Tennessee. 



652 REPUBLICANISM AND 



CONSTITUTION 



ARTICLE I. 

Section 1. — A Church of Christ is a company of 
believers immersed upon a profession of an evangeli- 
cal faith, voluntarily associated, on terms of perfect 
equality, in a covenant or agreement, implied or ex- 
pressed, to receive the New Testament as their only 
rule of faith and practice, and to be governed by its 
teachings in all things. 

Sec. 2. — A particular Church may consist of any 
number not less than " two or three " gathered together 
in the name of Christ. 

Sec. 3. — ISTone should be admitted into the Chu^eh, 
or be permitted to receive any of its ordinances, except 
by baptism upon a profession of faith in Christ. 

Sec. 4. — Each particular Church is independent of 
every other body, civil or ecclesiastical, and receiving 
its authority directly from Christ, it is accountable to 
him alone. 

The Teaching of Scripture 

See Matt. iii. 2-13 : John baptized none except upon a profession 
of faith in Christ. 

John iv. 1 : Jesus made disciples before he baptized them. 

Matt, xxviii. 19, 20 : None were to be baptized before they had 
been discipled, or taught to observe secondary duties before the pri- 
mary ones had been discharged — as faith in Christ, and baptism. 

John iii. 5 : No man is entitled to membership in the kingdom of 
God on earth, except he be a believer in Christ—regenerated. 









CHRISTIANITY DIRECT. 553 

Acts i. 15 : The first Church in Jerusalem was composed of disci- 
ples. 

Acts ii. 37, 41, 46, 47 : All who were added to the existing Church 
on the day of Pentecost, were baptized believers — saved persons. 

Acts viii. 12 : The whole Church at Samaria consisted of baptized 
believers. 

2. Cor. vi. 14-18 : Paul positively forbids the amalgamation of be- 
lievers and unbelievers in the Church of God, and enjoins a rigid 
separation between the world and the Church. 

Gal. iii. 26, 27 : Paul declared that the Church of Galatia were all 
the children of God by faith in Christ, and that all had put on Christ 
— publicly professed their obedience to him — in baptism. 

Gal. iv. 22-31 : Unregenerate children and sinners— typified by 
Hagar and Ishmael, who were born by natural generation, have no 
claims to Church membership with believers — Abraham's spiritual 
seed typified by Isaac, who was supernaturally born. 

1 Cor. i. 2 : Paul addressed this Church as a company of sanctified 
persons — saints. See address to churches in all the Epistles. 

Christ designed that there should be the most perfect equality 
among his disciples : that, united together as brethren, they should 
all enjoy equal rights and equal privileges — that there should be no 
privileged order or class of men, and that no factitious distinction, 
as Rabbi, or Doctor of Divinity, should either be granted or recog- 
nized among them. 

*• Be not ye called Rabbi, for one is your master, even Christ ; and 
all ye are brethren," i. e., equal. 

' Neither be ye called masters, for one is your master, Christ. But 
he that is the greatest among you shall be your servant." (Matt, xxiii.) 

Rom. vi. 1-6 : All the members of the Church at Rome had been 
baptized into Christ — into public allegiance to him as their Saviour 
and king— into his death — a promise of conformation to it, by a repre- 
sentation of it by burial in water ; had risen to walk in a new life, &c. 

The proof to establish Sees. 1 and 3 can be almost indefinitely in- 
creased. 

To sustain Sees. 2 and 4 see Matt, xviii. 20. To be gathered to- 
gether in the name of Christ, may mean in the capacity of a Church ; 
See 1 Cor. v. 4, which undoubtedly means in Church capacity. 

Col. iv. 15 : There was a Church in the house of Nymphas, vsrhich 
may have consisted of only his own family . 

24 



554 REPUBLICANISM AND 

Rom. xvi. 19 : There was a Church in the house of PrLscilla and 
Aquila; and there was the Church at Jerusalem, and the churcha of 
Judea, Galilee, and Samaria ; of Corinth, Ephesus, Rome, Philippi ; 
and the Seven Churches in Asia, which were but a comparatively 
short distance apart. These passages show conclusively that a Christ- 
ian Church is not an extensive hierarchy — a consociation or consol- 
idated organization of all the particular churches in a whole king- 
dom or country, as the Methodist E. Church, the Protestant E. Church, 
or Presbyterian churches of North America ; or a national religious 
establishment, like the Episcopal Church of England, the Presbyterian 
national Church of Scotland, or the Lutheran Church of Germany, 
&c. " My kingdom is not of this world," said Christ. 

If bodies of the above character are not Christian churches, we 
ought not to call them so, or recognize them before the world by a 
recognition of their ordinances or officers, as receiving their baptisms 
and ordinations as valid, or inviting their ministers into our pulpits, 
and thus say to their followers and to the world, " These men are the 
official ministers of Christian churches, hear ye them." 

"They (the bodies above named) are not churches, and God has 
given us no leave to call them so." — OrowelVs Ch. Man., p. 36. 

Historical and other Authority. 

The Earliest Writers. — Tertullian says, u Ubi tres ecclesia est 
licet laici,'' three arc sufficient to form a Church, although they be 
laymen. 

Bionysius Alexandrinus wrote to Stephen, Bishop of Rome, thus : 
" Understand now, brother, that all the churches throughout the 
East, yea, and beyond, are united together, which aforetime were di- 
vided and at discord among themselves. All the governors of the 
churches every where are at one," &c. — Eusebius, 1 7, c. 3 {vide pas- 
sim) . 

Irex^eus: Ea quse est in quoque loco ecclesia," tnat Church which 
is in any place. 

Socrates Scholasticus : " For this noisome pestilence beginning 
from the churches of Alexandria." " Not only presidents and elders 
of the churches.'' 

^Egisippus : When they were gone, it is said they were rulers over 
— i. e., officers in — " churches." — Eusebius, 1. 3, c. 17. 

Sozomenus : Partly to set in order whole churches. 



CHRISTIANITY DIRECT. 555 

Iren^eus: "All the churches of Asia."— Eusebius, 1. 4, „: 13. 

Euagrius : Cyril, bishop of. Alexandria, wrote in a letter to John 
bishop of Antioch: "Christ hath granted peace unto the churches 
under heaven." " Seeing that as well your churches as ours."— Eua- 
grius, lib. 1 c. 6. 

Clement, Bishop of Alexandria : " The congregation of the elect I 
call the Church." 

Ignatius, Cyprian, and Origen, when speaking of a particular con- 
gregation, call it a Church, as « the Church in Alexandria," " the 
Church in Smyrna," " the Church in Athens," and in Antioch. The 
above are the oldest and all the writers of note in the first six cen- 
turies, and the like phrases abound throughout their writings. No 
such thing as a national Church, or a consolidated hierarchy was 
known in these centuries, but the seeds that afterwards ripened into 
such an establishment were beginning to be sown. '-After the idea 
of the Mosaic priesthood had been adopted in the Christian Church, 
the clergy, as was natural, elevated themselves far above the laity.— 
Giesseler, vol. i. p. 60. 

" What is the Church? It is not the clergy, it is not the councils, 
still less is it the Pope. It is the Christian people, it is the faith fuU' '— 
D 'Aubigne. 

See also definition of Church of Christ in Methodist Discipline, 
Book of Common Prayer, Augsburg Confession, and confessions of all 
the reformed churches ; it is universally defined " coetus credentium," 
a company of believers. 

Primitive Churches were Independent Bodies. 

[A. D. 117-193.] < ; All congregations were independent of one an- 
other, although some had a peculiar reputation more than others, on 
account of many circumstances, ex.gr., their apostolic origin, the 'im- 
portance of the city to which they belonged, or because they were 
mother churches."— Giesseler, ch. iii. § 53. 

They were Bodies of Baptized Believers. 

[A, D. 100.] •' All the churches in those primitive times were inde- 
pendent bodies; or none of them subject- to the jurisdiction of any 
other. It is as clear as the noonday, that all Christian churches had 
equal rights, and were, in all respects', on a footing of equality." 



556 KEPUBLICAXISM AND 

" During a great part of this [the 2d] century, all the churches 
continued to be, as at first, independent of each other, or were con- 
nected by no consociations or confederation ; each Church was a kind 
of little independent republic, governed by its own laws." 

"Although the ancient mode of Church government seemed, in 
general, to remain unaltered [A. D. 300-400], ye-t there was a 
gradual deflection from its rules, and an approximation towards the 
form of monarchy." 

" This change in the form of ecclesiastical government was fol- 
lowed by a corrupt state of the clergy." — Mosheim, vol. i. pp. 86, 
142. 201. See also, Neander, Coleman, Orchard, passim. 

" The Church is undoubtedly one, and so is the Human Race one, 
but not as a society. It was from the first, composed of distinct so- 
cieties ; which were called one, because formed on common principles. 
It is one society, only when considered as to its future existence." 

" The Church is one, then, not as consisting of one society, but 
because the various societies or churches were then modelled, and 
ought still to be so, on the same principles, and because they evjoy 
common privileges." —Kingdom of Christ, by Archbishop Whately (the 
highest living authority in the Church of England). 

The learned Dr. Owen fully maintains that in no approved writer 
for two hundred years after Christ, is mention made of any organized, 
visibly professing Church, except a local congregation." — Owen, as 
quoted by Crowcll {Church Manual, p. 36). 

''The usual and common acceptation of the word [ecclesia] is that 
of a particular Church, that is, a society of Christians, meeting together 
in one place under their proper pastors, for the performaace of reli- 
gious worship and the exercising of Christian Discipline. — Chancellor 
King, vide Primitive Church. 

Primitive Churches were composed of Baptized Believers. 

Tertullian, in his Apology to the governors of Africa, thus defines his 
Church : " We are a body united in or by a profession of religion, in 
the same rights of worship [in a perfect equality] and in the bonds of 
a common hope. We meet in one place, and form an assembly [Eccle- 
sia— Church], that we may, as it were, come before God in one united 
body, and so address him in prayer, &c." — Chapter 39. 



CHRISTIANITY DIRECT. 557 

Justin Martyr : As many as are persuaded and believe that the 
things which we teach and declare are true, and promise that they 
are determined to live accordingly, are taught to pray and to beseech 
God with fasting, to grant them remission of their past sins, while we 
also pray and fast with them." The person, '• having repented of his 
sins," is '' washed — in the laver of baptism." "And this washing 
is called illumination, since the minds of those who are thus in- 
structed are enlightened, and he who is enlightened is baptized also 
in the name of Jesus Christ,''' &c. " We, then, after having so washed 
him who hath expressed his conviction and prof essed the faith, lead him 
to those called brethren, where they are gathered together [as in 
Church capacity] to make common prayers with great earnestness, 
both for themselves, and for him who is now enlightened, and for all 
others in all places, that having learned the truth, we may be deemed 
worthy to be found men of godly conversation in our lives, and to 
keep the commandments, &c. — Justin- s Apology as translated by 
Chevallier. Sec. 80, 85. 

These passages, from the Apologies of Tertullian and Justin, are 
invaluable, and must forever settle the question with all candid persons, 
that in their day [A. D. 250-300] the churches of Christ were bodies 
of believers " washed in that laver of baptism," washed in that water 
" upon a profession of their faith, and are then united to the body, the 
Church, in the same rights of worship, and in the bonds of a common 
hope." If any one can think unconscious infants were baptized and 
received thus, let him reflect upon the above passage, in this Apology 
of Justin Martyr. 

" The apostles have also taught us for what reason this new birth 
is necessary. Since, at our first birth we were born without our know- 
ledge or consent, by ordinary natural means, and were brought up in 
bad habits, and evil instructions, in order that we may no longer re- 
main the children of necessity or of ignorance, but may become the 
children of choice and judgment, and may obtain in the water the 
remission of sins which we have before committed, the name of God, 
the Father and Lord of the universe, is pronounced over him who is 
willing to be born again, and hath repented of his 'sins."— * Apology, 
Sec. 80. 

The reader can see that they commenced calling the sign baptism 
by the thing signified— regeneration or the new birth. This led ulti- 
mately to the corruption of the ordinance, and introduced the dogma 



558 REPUBLICANISM AND 

of baptismal regeneration, which has been revived of late by A. Camp- 
bell, of Va., and which is the only design of baptism tanght m the 
Methodist Discipline. See office for baptism,Wesley's Treatise on Bap- 
tism, in Doctrinal Tracts. .-, • • 

The following note in Giesseler's History, upon this period, is sig- 
nificant, and of great weight in its bearing against infant baptism ; 
the existence of infant baptism in the second century : 

"At this period (A.D. 117-193) originated the custom of the Roman 
Church, which continued down to the middle ages, of requiring those 
who were baptized to recite the creed, first in Greek, then in Latin 
Cf. Edm Martenc de Antiquis Ecel. Ritibus, ed. 2, t. i. p. 88 ; A. 
Gavanti, Thesaurus, Sac, Ritnm. ed. G. M. Meratus 1. 1. p. 42' Gies - 
ler, vol. i. p. 150. It would be difficult for infant, to repeat the creed 

111 frT*PPK 

Mosheim, although aPedobaptist, upon the authority of these and the 
fathers of the first six centuries, frankly declares that during the first 
century, vkoever professed to regard Jesus Christ as **™*« 
the world, and to depend on him for salvation, was immediately bap- 
tized and admitted into the Church."-Vol. l. p. 88. 

So Neander, Coleman— et cum mul. eel. 



AETICLE II. 

Sec 1.— Powers of a Church.— The members of each 
particular Clmrcli are invested with full power to 
receive those whom they judge worthy into their fellow- 
ship administer the discipline of the body, try, censnre, 
and expel the unworthy, by a vote of the assembled 
body, in accordance with the teachings of the New 
Testament, 

Sec 2.— It is the right and duty of the members of 
each Church to select and elect their own teachers, 
pastors, and officers, and dismiss them when they 
judae bast for the interest of that particular Church ; 



CHRISTIANITY DIRECT. 559 

such officers being accountable to the Church for mal- 
feasance in office or unchristian conduct, as are the pri- 
vate members. 

Sec. 3. — Each particular Church, being independent 
and sovereign, is the highest source of authority, and 
from its decisions there can be no appeal ; it, however, 
can reconsider its own decisions, whenever the majority 
is in favor of a reconsideration. 

Sec. 4. — It is the right and duty of each Church, 
as "such, to decide and declare what it considers the 
teachings of Christ are respecting Church order, Church 
ordinances, laws, terms of communion, Christian doc- 
trine and duties, and to govern its members accord- 
ingly. 

Sec 5. — These powers, rights, and duties, cannot 
be delegated, nor conceded or alienated with impunity. 

Scriptural Proof. 

Mat. xviii. 14-20. Here the Saviour gives the minute details with 
respect to an offending member. If the offender cannot be brought to 
repentance by private remonstrance, he is to be arraigned before the 
whole Church — his brethren, his peers, and by them his case is tried 
and decided. If he will not submit to the decision of the Church, he 
is to be expelled. There is no higher ecclesiastical court to which he 
can appeal. He may apply to another Church, and that Church being 
an '' independent republic," can receive him, if it is satisfied that the 
judgment of the excluding Church was immature or unjust. Mark 
well ; the Saviour did not say, tell it to the class-leader, or the 
preacher in charge ; he did not say, report it to the committee, or 
to the Session of ruling elders ; did not say, tell it to the clergy, the 
Conference, the Presbytery, or the Assembly, but to the Church — the 
assembled membership of any particular Church, and if the voice of 
that body is not heard, when it is according to his teachings, expel 
him, and he would ratify the act in heaven. 



560 REPUBLICANISM AND 

x Cor v.— the whole chapter. There was an offending member in 
the Church at Corinth. Paul exhorted the brethren to exercise the 
needed discipline; mark, he did not write to the preacher or the 
Session to administer the discipline, but to the Church-the members 
of it See ver i : " In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye 
are come together, [*. ft, as a Church, evidently], and my Spirit, with 
the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such an one unto 
Satan," &c. See Mat. xviii. 20, 17, 18. 

That the supreme judicial and executive powers are vested in the 
membership,!* evident, from ver. 7 : -Purge out the old leaven, u a., 
expel from your body and fellowship-from the house of God-every 
unworthy member. This was addressed, not to the clergy, or the 
elders but to the membership of the Church. Such a command could 
not be' addressed to the Methodist Episcopal Church, North or South, 
nor to the Protestant Episcopal Church of America, nor yet to the 
Presbyterian Church of Geneva, of France, of Scotland, or America. 

Again : Vers. 12, 13, "Do ye not judge them that are within? But 
them that are without God judgeth." 

o cor ii -Read the whole chapter. The offending man above had 
been tried, and excluded from the Church at Corinth, and had now 
bitterly and truly repented of his sin, a, every Christian will ; and 
Paul knowing this to be the case, writes again to the Church-the 
brethren, the members-entreating them to restore the penitent man. 
He does not command them, but affectionately beseeches them to 
restore to the penitent their former fellowship, saying, Sufficient to 
such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many-the voice 
of the whole, or of the majority of the membership. The clergy, or 
the elders, are not so much as once named in either of these msiruc 
tions to the Church. . 

Rev chapters ii. ui.-The instructions and reproofs Christ gave to 
the seven churches in Asia, respecting discipline, doctrine or duty, 
W ere not addressed to bishops of Asia, or to ruling elders of the seven 
churches, tat to the members of each Church, through its minuter , 
thus receding them as invested with the supreme judical and d s- 
ciplinary powers ; and be teaches them also that they are, as churches 
dLtly responsible to him, and that he will inflict punishment for 
disobedience-blot out their organizations. 

Th apostle Paul, we have seen, did not presume, upon his own 
anlority, to expel or receive a member into the Church at Corinth, 



CHRISTIANITY DIRECT. 561 

nor did Peter receive the first Gentile converts upon his own author- 
ity. He first, took six brethren (enough to constitute two or three 
churches) with him, and when Cornelius and his friends professed 
faith in Christ, and demanded the rights and privileges of Christians, 
Peter evidently referred them to his brethren, saying, il Can any man 
forbid these persons to be baptized, wh@ have received the Holy 
Ghost as well as we ?'-' 

Touching the right of the members of each Church to have a voice 
in the selection of their teachers and pastors, and the election of their 
officers, we urge two arguments: — 

1. It is the inalienable right of all men to elect their own rulers, or 
officers, and teachers ; and the New Testament nowhere denies to 
Christians the exercise of it. 

2. The examples of such elections in the New Testament teach, that 
it is both the right and the duty of Church members to elect their 
teachers and officers. See Acts i. 15-26. The assembled Church 
elected, by their votes, an apostle in the place of Judas. 

Acts vi. 2, 6. The whole Church is called together, and, by their 
suffrage, they elect seven deacons, who are ordained by the apostles. 

2 Cor. viii. 18, 19, 23. A brother is chosen of the churches, to accom- 
pauy Titus and Paul to bear their benefactions, and distribute them 
among the poor saints in Jerusalem. 

See also Acts xv. 1, 2, 4, 12, 22, 23, 30. The brethren at Anti- 
och were brought into confusion by the teaching of certain Judaizing 
teachers, who had come down from Judea. They determined to ask 
for the advice of their brethren of the Church in Jerusalem, and of 
the apostles. They, the brethren, chose and sent messengers to go up 
and consult with them, and defray their expenses. These messengers 
go up and call the Church together with the apostles and elders. The 
Church determine, with the aid of the apostles, what advice to give, 
and wrote a letter to the brethren in Antioch, and Syria, and Cilicia, 
&c. The messengers returned to Antioch, and " gathered the mul- 
titude together," and submitted the epistle to them 

Historical Testimony. 

Clement of Rome says (Epistle i. 44) that the presbyters were at 
first appointed (katasthathentes) by the apostles, afterwards (upo 
eteron ellagimon andron su?ie udokesases its ccclesias pases. 
24* 



562 REPUBLICANISM AND 

Lyprian (Epistle 52) declares how the bishop or pastor of a Church 
was created and chosen : " Episcopus factus de Dei et Christi ejus 
judicio de clericorum testamento, de plebis suffragio." Also Epistle 
68 : " Plebs ipsa maxime habet potestam vel elgendi dignos sacer- 
dotes, vel indignos recusandi." The people themselves especially 
have the power either to elect suitable ministers, or to reject or expel 
unworthy ones. Origen, in his Homily vi. c. 3, "Et Episcopus de- 
ligaturplebe presente." The bishop is elected by the people pre- 
sent. And he assigns a potential reason for the wisdom of Christ in 
vesting the election in them : " Quae singulorum vitain, plenissime 
novit, et uniuscujusque actum de ejus conversatione perspexit." 
Since they have known most intimately the life of each [one of the 
candidates,] having witnessed the acts and conversation of each. 
See Giesseler, vol. i. ch. iv. § 69. 

Little by little, commencing in the third century, the clergy, 
coveting more authority, usurped the rights of the people, until the 
pure secession, when the Catholic party became first an aristocracy, 
then a hierarchy, then popery, while the pure churches everywhere 
retained their original scriptural government— an executive demo- 
cracy. Orchard's His. F. B. 

[A. D. 100-200.] ;; The highest authority was in the people, or the 
whole body of Christians. *' The assembled people elected their own 
rulers and teachers, or by authoritative consent received them when 
nominated to them." 

The assembled people did every thing that is proper for those in whom 
the supreme power of the community is vested; excluded profligate and 
lapsed brethren, and restored them; they decided the controversies and 
disputes that arose ; they heard and determined the causes of pres- 
byters and deacons."— Mosheim, vol. i. pp. 81, 82. SeeNeander, Lord 
King, Coleman.* 



* The reader can see how weak the claims of the Methodist hierarchy to be con- 
sidered a Church of Christ. It professes the same form of government th-o corrupt 
party possessed [A. D. 300-606] ; the next step is popery outright 



CHRISTIANITY DIRECT. 563 

AET. III. 

Sec. 1. — Officers and their rank and duties. — There are 
but two officers in the Church of Christ — pastors (eld- 
ers or bishops), and deacons. 

Sec. 2. — Pastors or bishops are of the same order or 
rank, and exercise eqiial authority. It is their office 
to teach, and take the oversight of the Church in all 
things pertaining to doctrine and discipline, according 
to the inspired word. 

Sec. 3. — They must be men irreproachable in their 
private and public relations in life. 

Sec. 4. — It is the duty of the deacons, of whom 
there may be seven, to take charge of all the tempor- 
alities of the Church. 

Sec. 5. — They must be men spiritually-minded, and 
of unquestioned probity. 

SCRIPTURAL PROOF. 

If there were more than two prominent officers in the Apostolic 
Churches, we have no acount of either their ordination, their qualifi- 
cations, or their respective duties. But we learn from the writings of 
the apostles, that the terms bishops and elders are used interchangeably, 
i. €., one in the place of the other ; and in the same chapter, the eld- 
ers of the Church in Ephesus, are also called episcopoi, bishops, or 
overseers. See Acts xx. 17, 28. Query. "Why did not our episcopal 
translators translate " episcopor' in the 2Sth v., bishops instead of 
overseers ? Would it not have robbed them of their bishopricks ? See 
1 Pet. v. 1, 4, where the duties of episcopoi-bishops are enjoined upon 
the elders of the Churches of Pontus, Galatia, &c. 

Now, like duties require like qualifications ; and the duties of elders 
being identical with those of bishops, as we have seen, their qualifica- 
tions must be the same. These three facts, viz., that the same terms 
are applied to elders as to bishops, that the same duties are required 



564 REPUBLICANISM AND 

of the elders as the bishops, and their qualifications, consequently, 
being the same, evidence, clear as demonstration, that bishops and 
elders are only two titles applied to the same officer. 

Paul, in giving instruction to Timothy, his son, in the Gospel, touch- 
ing the government of his own conduct, and of the Church, also the 
qualifications of the officers to be appointed, mentions only two, i. e., 
the bishop and the deacons. We may very safely conclude, if there 
had been other officers to be appointed, their qualifications would have 
been laid down. Acts vi. 1-7 ; 1 Tim. iii. 1-13 ; Phil. i. 1. That elders 
or bishops, and deacons were the only apostolic officers, and the two 
former of the same rank and authority, being two names for the same 
officer, is the unanimous verdict of all standard historians ; and is 
conceded, advocated by Lord King, whose titles converted Mr. Wes- 
ley from Episcopacy — the doctrine of three orders in the ministry, 
i. e., deaoons, elders, and bishops ; and Mr. Wesley, in his writings, 
admits that elder and bishop are but two words for the same officer. 



ARTICLE IV. 

Sec. 1. — Ordinances. — There are two commemo- 
rative institutions in the Christian Church: Baptism 
and the Lord's Supper ; and these are under its espe- 
cial guardianship, and for the integrity of their form, 
and purity of their design, the Church is held respon- 
sible. 

Sec. 2. — Design of Baptism. — Baptism is to be grant- 
ed by believers only, in which they are to set forth 
their entire subjection to Christ, and profess their faith 
in him as their Saviour and King — figuring in their 
baptism their death to sin — their burial and resurrec- 
tion with Christ, and their obligation to walk in a new 
life. Their baptism is to them also a pledge of their 
own glorious resurrection. 

Sec 3. — Lord's Supper — its design. — The Lord's 



CHRISTIANITY DIRECT. 565 

Supper is designed to show forth the love and death 
of the Saviour, the wine representing his blood, with 
which the new covenant, ratified to every believer — he 
being cleansed from sin by its atoning efficacy ; the 
bread represents his mangled body, in which he bore 
the believer's sins upon the tree. While we remem- 
ber the love of Christ for us, which was unto death, 
we should also remember his promise, to come again. 

SCRIPTURAL AUTHORITY. 

Mat. iii. 1, 6, 11 ; xxviii. 19, 20 ; Mark i. 8, 4, 9 ; xvi. 16 ; Luke iii. 
7, 15, 16, 21 ; vii. 20 ; John i. 28, 31 ; iii. 22, 23, 28 ; iv. 1 ; Acts ii. 
38, 41 ; yiii. 12, 16, 36, 38 ; x. 47. 48 ; xvi. 15, 33 ; xviii. 8 ; xix. 3, 
5 ; Rom. vi. 1, 6 ; 1 Cor. xv. 29 ; Gal. iii. 27 ; Mat. xxvi. 27 ; Mark 
xiv. 23 ; Luke xxii. 17, 20 ; 1 Cor. xi. 20, 25, 56, 27. 

ASSOCIATIONS AND CONTENTIONS. 

Local Associations are not judicatories, to which the churches are 
amenable, and to which cases of Church discipline are appealed ; but 
they are the creatures of the churches, composed of messengers, 
chosen and sent annually. They are not clerical bodies, but composed 
mainly of laymen. The object of these local associations is to learn 
the exact state of the churches, and the amount of religious destitu- 
tion within their boundaries, and to consult and recommend to the 
churches the best " ways and means" of supplying it by cooperation ; 
also, to foster other interests, for the advancement of the Redeemer's 
kingdom. They are also advising councils, and as such, give advice 
touching questions of practice or discipline, but they cannot legislate 
for the churches, which are sovereign, independent bodies. The 
churches are free to associate in these bodies or not. Local associa- 
tions and conventions are bodies composed of messengers from the 
local associations and churches, and are similar bodies, to direct the 
general missionary operations, and other interests of the whole State, 
or of several States. They are not judicial, but executive bodies ; 
nor are they a part of the Church. The churches or associations may 
or may not cooperate with these bodies without affecting Church re- 
lation. 



566 REPUBLICANISM AND 

It E MAKES. 

The above is an epitome of Baptist Church Polity. It is not a con- 
solidated hierarchy or despotism, but an executive democracy, and 
voluntary in all its features ; while it is not so efficient as are those 
for self-extension, it is not obnoxious to the same objections, viz., un- 
seripturalness and potency for evil, when its doctrines have become 
corrupt, and the spirituality of its members extinguished. It has been 
Well remarked, " Our Church government is fully sufficient for the 
ends intended to be answered by him who gave it, binding Christians 
together just as long and as closely as is desirable, and no more. Like 
the skin of the fruit, which is sufficient to bind and preserve the whole 
so long as the pulp is sound, and the juices are wholesome, but when 
these decay, the skin at once dissolves and lets the mass drop to pieces. 
So our forms of Church government are simple and slender, but quite 
sufficient to unite both individuals and churches together, so long as 
they are actuated by the life and indwelling Spirit of Christ. But 
the whole is purposely bound together in such a manner that, when 
that vital presence no longer pervades, the whole may drop to pieces 
like a rope of sand. Other forms may have a stronger power to pre- 
serve in an external unity after the life has departed, as the Church 
of Rome, or Methodist hierarchy ; but what is it they then bind to- 
gether in such a case ? A mass of ecclesiastical corruption. 

PROMISES TO THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 

Dan. ii. 4L And in the days of these kings [the Roman] shall the 
God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed : and 
the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in 
pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever." 

Matt. xvi. 18. Upon this rock I will build my Church, and the 
gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Matt, xxviii. 20. "And, lo, 
I am with you always, even unto the end." 

"And the woman fled into the wilderness \i. e., obscurity], where 
she had a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a 
thousand two hundred and threescore days [years]" (Rev. xii. 6.) 

"And there was given unto him [the beast] a mouth speaking great 
things and blasphemies 5 and power was given unto him to continue 
forty-two months [126 years], and it was give nunto him to make war 
with the saints, and to overcome [or prevail against]." (Rev. xiii. 5,7.) 

"And he [the little horn, or papacy] shall speak great words against 



CHRISTIANITY DIRECT. 567 

the Most High, and shall wear down the saints of the Most High, and 
think to change times and laws, and they shall be given into his hand 
until a time, and times, and the dividing of time" [i e., " a time" 
one year, " times" two years, and a dividing of. or half a time, one 
half year— 3>s$ years=42 months=1260 years]. But the judgment shall 
sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume it unto the 
end. And the kingdom and dominion and the greatness of the king- 
dom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints 
of the Most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all 
dominions shall serve and obey him." (Dan. vii. 25, 27.) 

" Thy kingdom come ; thy will be done on earth, as it is done in 
heaven." The Christian's Prayer. 

Baptists claim these promises, since they alone have suffered the 
persecutions of the beast for now nearly 1260 years. They under- 
stand the above Scriptures to teach, 1. That the God of heaven — 
Christ — founded a visible Church or kingdom on earth, in the days of 
the Caesars — the Roman kings. 2. That this kingdom was never to 
" be broken in pieces," obliterated, nor given to another people ; the 
same character of subjects should ever compose it, i. e., believers ; and 
that it must stand forever, despite the malice or powers of hell. That 
with his Church or kingdom, Christ has ever promised to be ; and for 
these reasons they will never need reforms, since he will not suffer 
them to fall into fundamental errors. But, as their great Captain and 
High Priest, was made perfect through suffering, so it became his fol- 
lowers to be, and therefore the beast was permitted to persecute them 
and wear them down, and drive them into the wilderness, away from 
public notice, into obscurity and reproach, for the space of 1260 years ; 
after which period the beast is to be consumed — the Church of Christ 
come forth out of the wilderness, leaning upon the arm of her be- 
loved, fair as the moon, clear as the sun, and terrible as an army with 
banners, to all her persecuting and despising foes. 

Baptists claim these promises, because their churches are built ac- 
cording to the pattern Christ gave, and they take his teachings alone 
for the government of their faith and practice. They alone have 
existed as pure communities of Christians, from the day of his ascen- 
sion until now. They alone, of all religious sects, have suffered the 
cruel persecutions of the beast for 1260 years, their enemies them- 
selves being judges. Baptists believe that the days of their obscurity, 
persecution and reproach, are fast drawing to a close, and the day 
beginning to dawn when it will no longer be a reproach to be a Bap- 



568 REPUBLICANISM AND 

tist. The beast took his throne A. D. 006, and, therefore, his end 
draweth nigh, and with it the dishonor and ignominy of the bride of 
Christ. 

If any doubt that Baptist churches have existed in various coun- 
tries, and in every century, from the days of John the Baptist until 
now, he is commended to the perusal of Orchard's History of Foreign 
Baptists, from A. D. 33 to 1800, compiled from the annals of the In- 
quisition, and the most authentic civil and ecclesiastical histories. 

I submit here a few extracts from the preliminary essay by the 
editor : — 

''For the last two hundred years our enemies, conjointly, have 
made one continuous effort to depreciate the claims of Baptists to an 
ancient origin. Like the animal in the manger, who, not being able 
to eat the hay himself, was determined the oxen should not, — so they, 
satisfied that they cannot claim an origin prior to the days of Luther, 
seem determined that no one shall believe that Baptists have a valid 
claim to a more ancient origin. They allege that the madmen of 
Munster were Baptists, and that Baptists, as such, were the authors 
of the rebellion and all the excesses of that period ; and they point 
us to Munster when we speak of our origin and history, and sneer- 
ingiy say, ' There was your origin, and that your early history.' 

" In vindication, we point them to the pages of Merle d'Aubigne : — 

" ' On one point, it seems necessary to guard against misapprehen- 
sion. Some persons imagine that the Anabaptists of the times of the 
Reformation, and the Baptists of our day, are the same. But they are 
as different as possible.' 

"Fessenden's Encyclopedia (quoted with approbation by D'Au- 
bigne) says : — 

" 'Anabaptist. — The English and Dutch Baptists do not consider the 
word as at all applicable to their sect.' ' It is but justice to observe 
that the Baptists of Holland, England, and the United States, are to be 
essentially distinct from those seditious and fanatical individuals 
above mentioned ; as they profess au equal aversion to all principles 
of rebellion of the one, and enthusiasm of the other.' — Pre/, to Ref., 
p. 10. 

" We ask Zwinglius, the celebrated Swiss reformer, who was contem- 
porary with Luther, Muncer and Stork, ' Is Anabaptism a novelty, 
and did it spring up in your day ?' 

i; < The institution of Anabaptism is no novelty, but for 300 years has 
caused great disturbance in the Church, and has acquired such a 






CHRISTIANITY DIRECT. 569 

strength, that the attempt in this age to contend with it appeared 
futile for a time.' This carries our history back to A. D. 225 ! 

But, have we not been persecuted and worn down for, lo ! these 
twelve hundred years ? has not the " Woman" apocalyptic, during all 
this time, been drunk with our blood, and heaven filling with our 
martyred brethren ? We appeal to Cardinal Hosius, President of the 
Council of Trent [A. D. 1750], the most learned and powerful Catho- 
lic of his day. Hear him testify : — 

" If the truth of religion were to be judged of by the readiness and 
cheerfulness which a man of any sect shows in suffering, then the 
opinion and persuasion of no sect can be truer and surer than that of 
Anabaptists [Baptists] , since there have been none, for these twelve hun- 
dred years past, that have been more generally punished,or that have more 
cheerfully and steadfastly undergone, and even offered themselves to, 
the most cruel sorts of punishment, than these people." * * * 

We appeal to the most eminent scholars and historians of Europe, 
to the matured verdict rendered by Dr. J. J. Durmont, Chaplain to 
the King of Holland, and to Dr. Ypeig, Professor of Theology in the 
University of Groningen, who were especially appointed by the king 
to ascertain if the claims of the Dutch Baptists had any foundation in 
facts of history. These distinguished men did go into the investiga- 
tion ; and what did they report to the king ? That Baptists originated 
at Munster, as we are charged by authors whose works are now pub- 
lished, and sent broadcast over this land by the " Methodist Book 
Concern?" This is what they reported ; whioh has never been dis- 
proved, or attempted to be disproved : — 

" The Mennonites are descended from the tolerably pure evangeli- 
cal Waldenses, who were driven by persecution into various coun- 
tries 5 and who, during the latter part of the twelfth century, fled 
into Flanders, and into the provinces of Holland and Zealand, where 
they lived simple and exemplary lives — in the villages as farmers, in 
the towns by trades, free from the charge of any gross immoralities, 
and professing the most pure and simple principles, which they exem- 
plified in a holy conversation. They were, therefore, in existence long 
before the Reformed Church of the Netherlands." 

Again : '" We have now seen that the Baptists, who were formerly 
called Anabaptists, and in later times Mennonites, were the original 
Waldenses ; and who have long in the history of the Church, received 
the honor of that origin. On this account, the Baptists may be 

CONSIDERED AS THE ONLY CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY WHICH HAS STOOD SINCE 



570 REPUBLICANISM DIRECT. 

the Apostles ; and as a Christian Society which has preserved 
pure the doctrine of the Gospel through all ages. The perfectly 
correct external economy of the Baptist denomination tends to con- 
firm the truth, disputed by the Romish Church, that the Reformation 
brought about in the sixteenth century was in the highest degree 
necessary ; and, at the same time, goes to refute the erroneous notion 
of the Catholics, that their communion is the most ancient." See 
Encyclopedia Rel. Knowl. 

It is an interesting fact, that, as a consequence of .ids, the govern- 
ment of Holland offered to the Mennonite churches tne support of the 
state. It was politely but firmly declined, as inconsistent with their 
fundamental principles. 

We point them to Mosheiin, himself a Lutheran, yet living upon the 
soil, and a bitter enemy of Baptists. He was conversant with all the 
facts. Does he say that the Baptists had their origin at Munster ? 
Hear him : — 

" The true origin of that sect which acquired the name of Anabap- 
tists, by their administering anew the rite of baptism to those who 
came over to their communion, and derived that of Mennonites from 
that famous man to whom they owe the greatest part of their present 
felicity, is hid in the remote depths op antiquity, and is, conse- 
quently, extremely difficult to be ascertained."* — Vol. iv. p. 427.t 

Finally, and with still greater triumph, we now appeal to the pages 
of this history, upon which, not our enemies only, but the credulous 
and fearful of our own brethren, may see the clearest and most satis- 
factory proof, that not in one country alone, but in many kingdoms, 
successions of Baptist communities have come down to us from the 
Apostles, all striped, and scarred, and blood-covered — a line of martyrs 
slain by prisons, by fire, and by sword, whom we hail as the faithful 
and true witnesses of Jesus, during those fearful ages, when the Man 
of Sin 

Sat upon the seven hills, 
And from his throne of darkness ruled the world. 

And we may well be proud to be able to claim these as our breth- 
ren. Would that we were worthier to bear their name. 

* This difficult task has been most successfully completed by Orchard, of England, 
and his liistory has been reprinted by the Tenn. Pub. Society, 
f This is from the edition of 1811. 



ED 71 













<> 





<* 



* * S • • #■ O 


















,^ 



C^ 





$VvJp\/ Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. . 

^ 1 T £^$0& Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 

It/^yPvOtf* ^y^. J ^Hlf Treatment Date: May 2006 

% ^ p reSerVat j 0n J eC f in0 | gj eS 

,& , O " o „ ■<$> A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION J 

«J "^ • ^vv\VY\>§l * "5^ 1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 

U&, «/. «£ > Cranberry Township, PA 16066 

^ < (724)779-2111 



% 







^/ 



JUN 82:** v \/^y ^ < 

ST. AUGUSTINE . ^ ' fl -» 0_ a^ o " ^^^ 



DOBBS BROS. 

LIBRARY BINDING 0° 






